On 09/30/2015 07:45 AM, Fabian Deutsch wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek(a)in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 08:35:41AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> * All packages not in the critical path whose upstreams allow them to
>> be build against system libraries '''must''' be built
against system
>> libraries.
>> * All packages not in the critical path whose upstreams have no
>> mechanism to build against system libraries '''must''' be
contacted
>> publicly about a path to supporting system libraries. If upstream
>> refuses, this must be recorded in a link included in the spec file.
>> * All packages not in non-critical path whose upstreams have no
>> mechanism to build against system libraries '''may''' opt
to carry
>> bundled libraries, but if they do, they '''must'''
include {{{Provides:
>> bundled(<libname>) = <version>}}} in their RPM spec file.
>
> Very reasonable imho.
Yes, I also see this as a good compromise.
We then have the ability to at least track bundling.
- fabian
I'd just like to point out that we have always had the requirement for
package that bundled libraries to carry the "Provides: bundled(libname)"
metadata. What's new here is not needing to go through the FPC to get
an exception. Which perhaps leads to people not declaring their
packages bundled libraries.
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301
http://www.cora.nwra.com