Proposal to reduce anti-bundling requirements

[Reindl Harald]

Am 11.09.2015 um 15:27 schrieb Zdenek Kabelac:
> Dne 11.9.2015 v 15:22 Eric Griffith napsal(a):
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2015 9:03 AM, "Zdenek Kabelac" <zkabelac at redhat.com
>> <mailto:zkabelac at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Dne 11.9.2015 v 14:46 Germano Massullo napsal(a):
>>  >
>>  > Fault #1
>>  > (I've already complained that usage of rawhide & rpmfusion is
>> getting silly)
>>  >
>>  >
>> How is the usage getting silly? *genuinely confused* Id love for
>> Fedora to
>> have everything in the repos (A la Arch) but for legal and philosophical
>> reasons it's not possible.
>
> My complain here is about packaging libraries.
> And just because a library has been upgraded from version .so.2 to
> version .so.4  and you can't have both (as the new one replaces old one
> by Fedora policy) - you cannot normally use rpmfusion.

the whole point of a *shared library* is to have single versions of 
libraries and not 10 versions you need to seek if they are affacted from 
wahtever security relevant bug, in many cases it will be impossible to 
answer that question

and no, backporting of fixes is not the solution, ignoring manpower 
here, how often do you think developers are fixing some bug and even not 
realize it was security relevant and so no CVE is assigned

not long ago glibc was affactd by such a case

> The best part is - the library itself is mostly useless - but because of
> packaging policy - if you want to use rpmfusion - you have to basically
> build
> lib-compat-like (Fedora way) libraries yourself - that's what I call
> silly....

no, rpmfusion just need to cope with rawhide changes and rebuild as 
Fedora does

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150911/fbb3bcef/attachment.sig>