Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac at redhat.com> wrote:

> Dne 11.9.2015 v 14:46 Germano Massullo napsal(a):
>
>> I have read the whole discussion and I would like to share my opinion,
>> even if I think it could be a bit off-topic.
>> Given that Fedora community alone, cannot educate every upstream
>> developer about unbundling, and considering that it is a problem that
>> interests all main Linux distributions: I think that Fedora community
>> could (and should) propose to other Linux distribution communities to
>> make a general effort to kindly ask upstream devs to reconsider their
>> work, enforcing unbundling.
>> This will take years, but I think it is a way we should cover.
>>
>>
> How Fedora wants to educate 'upstream' when it rather fails on many levels
> when we talk about library handling.
>
> Fault #1
>
> Fedora badly supports multiple libraries of different version - i.e.
> typically full rebuild of whole repo is made when new library is introduced
> - which is typically quite bad idea (and this is not just because of simple
> version change requires reload of many GB of packages)
> (I've already complained that usage of rawhide & rpmfusion is getting
> silly)
>
>
>
> Fault #2
>
> Version of libraries is wrongly handled on packaging level as well as on
> build level and many library packages are not correctly versioned - so if
> someone believe there is some use of  libname.so.major.minor.patch - for
> RPM it's mostly useless and if symbols are not properly version inside
> library, dependency will simply not work -  and just adding 'constant'
> version string to every symbol inside library will not make this work
>
> Zdenek
>
>
​I get the feeling this is related to Fedora not aggressively using
versioned package names for libraries, or at least enabling some kind
parallel installing capability. SUSE used to follow a policy similar to our
current one, but switched due to the insanity and impracticality. Mageia
also uses a policy almost identical to SUSE's.

For an example, here's SUSE's policy:
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Shared_library_packaging_policy​

​I've been meaning to ask about why we don't do this for a while now, but
it seems like now is a good of a time as any...​



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150911/a3f79606/attachment-0001.html>