Orphaning libunwind

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:00:17 +0100, Josh Boyer wrote:
> So are you not orphaning libunwind until that is merged into the
> upstream kernel?

To get the terminology right:
I am 'orphaning' it now.  Later it may be 'obsolsted'.

If I should keep it formally maintaining I could.  But factically it won't
change what I really do with the libunwind package.  I have not fixed any
libunwind bug since 2009 and there is no one filed in RH BZ now; except
	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863781
rebase to 1.1 which I do not find meaningful for Fedora anymore, at least not
from my perspective.

I know about too many bugs in libunwind and I have found it easier to rather
reimplement the remaining few bits of elfutils so that elfutils can unwind on
its own.


> What about perf releases that support libunwind in older Fedora
> releases?  Will you wait until all of those have been rebased?

As I said I have not fixed anything in libunwind for the past 3 years and also
I have even never found the non-ia64 part of libunwind meaningful before.

I can write my name into pkgdb ownership field back if you wish so.


> If perf winds up getting stuck relying on an orphaned library for some
> non-trivial amount of time,

AFAIK that is common in Fedora there are orphaned libraries in use for
a release or two.


> I'd rather just turn off libunwind support in perf now.  It's only enabled
> in rawhide at the moment because it is a 3.7 feature.  Before we bring 3.7
> back to f17-f18, we should probably decide.

That is more a question to Jiri Olsa, the author of perf libunwind client.


Jan