On St, 2016-10-12 at 10:28 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 10.10.2016 v 16:29 Tomas Mraz napsal(a):
>
> On So, 2016-10-08 at 13:37 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> > Tomas Mraz wrote:
> > >
> > > At worst if the patching of a package is highly non-trivial and
> > > the
> > > upstream is not responsive we might have to drop the package
> > > from
> > > Fedora.
> > >
> > > We do not want to keep 1.0.2 devel around as that could make it
> > > to
> > > look
> > > like the 1.0.2 is still fully "supported" in Fedora and there
> > > would
> > > be
> > > no incentive to switch to 1.1.0. Also to get any new features
> > > from
> > > upstream OpenSSL we have to move to newer versions as they are
> > > released
> > > as the old versions get only bug fixes.
> > IMHO, this is not acceptable. If the API of a library changes
> > enough
> > to
> > warrant a compat package, you have to provide the -devel for the
> > compat
> > package as well. Dropping all the packages that don't build
> > against
> > the new
> > incompatible version from Fedora is not a reasonable plan.
> We will work on porting the dependent packages to the new API. If
> by
> some reasonable deadline there are still some packages that are not
> dead by other reasons and we are unable to port them we can add
> -devel
> to the compat package. Note though that small changes in such
> packages
> will be needed anyway as the include files of the compat package
> will
> have to be in non-default include directory. (If the package
> doesn't
> use pkgconfig to find the needed CFLAGS automatically.)
>
But what about stable versions of libraries applications? For
example,
in current Rawhide, you won't be able to build any stable Ruby
version
downloaded as tarball without the compat-openssl-devel. And it is
question, if upstream will be able to backport the OpenSSL 1.1.0
support
into stable Ruby versions [1]. Not mentioning all the older Ruby
versions which are unsupported, but up until now, you could build
them
on your own (actually it should be possible to disable the OpenSSL
support, but that is not common scenario).
I personally don't care much about this scenario, but I am pretty
sure
that others might care more ....
Yes, I am getting more and more inclined to ship compat-openssl10-
devel. However I will make it conflicting with openssl-devel and its
use for Fedora packages should be strongly discouraged.
--
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
Turkish proverb
(You'll never know whether the road is wrong though.)