[PATCH] Add sample eppic scripts to kexec-tools-eppic package

[Vivek Goyal]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 01:55:56PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> On 09/19/14 at 09:12am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:03:04AM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> > > On 09/18/14 at 09:24am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 01:49:09PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
> > > > > Upstream makedumpfile contains some sample eppic scripts for reference.
> > > > > Now pull the whole scripts directory into kexec-tools-eppic package.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: WANG Chao <chaowang at redhat.com>
> > > > 
> > > > If scripts are part of makedumpfile, then it should be part of kexec-tools
> > > > package and not kexec-tools-eppic?
> > > 
> > > # rpm -ql kexec-tools-eppic
> > > /usr/lib64/eppic_makedumpfile.so
> > > 
> > > These sample scripts are eppic language, and they  won't work without
> > > eppic_makedumpfile.so. It makes sense to put them along with
> > > eppic_makedumpfile.so. That means in kexec-tools-eppic package.
> > 
> > I don't think it is a good idea to take this code away from makedumpfile
> > and pack into kexec-tools-eppic package. If there is a dependency, then
> > we need to make kexec-tools package dependent on kexec-tools-eppic.
> 
> eppic_makedumpfile.so is also built within makedumpfile. But we packed
> it in kexec-tools-eppic. I don't why we did that at the first place
> though.
> 
> > 
> > I think more we move away from upstream, more prblems it will create for
> > us going down the line.
> 
> We don't move away from upstream. We just pack makedumpfile binaries
> into two packages. It's already done like that.
> 
> > 
> > So I would still prefer that we pacakge these scripts as part of
> > kexec-tools as these are part of makeudmpfile upstream. And if need be
> > create a dependency on kexec-tools-eppic package during installation.
> 
> I don't think putting these scripts into kexec-tools make sense. Because
> eppic support is more like a "plugin" for makedumpfile. Now we put
> eppic_makedumpfile.so in kexec-tools-eppic, we should put the sample
> scripts for this "plugin" all together with the "plugin". It doesn't
> sound right to me to seperate the sample eppic scripts and
> eppic_makedumpfile.so, because the sample eppic scripts standalone
> doesn't work and people have no idea what're these for.

Ok, so eppic_makedumpfile.so is also part of makedumpfile but we pack
it in a subpackage. And I think we did it because we did not want  to
bloat size of initramfs.

Given that eppic_makedumpfile.so will not be packed into initramfs
by default as makedumpfile does dlopen() and there are no dependencies
as shown by ldd, I think in long term it makes sense to remove 
kexec-tools-eppic package and pull everything into kexec-tools.

This will atleast remove some of the confusion. Upstream modle itself
is little strange. Source code for eepic comes from somewhere else and
actual library is generated by makedumpfile.

So in short term, I think I am fine with your approach of putting eepic
scripts in kexec-tools-eppic package. But in long term, let us do some
cleanup and get rid of kexec-tools-eppic package altogether.

Thanks
Vivek

> 
> Thanks
> WANG Chao