FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-18-2012, 09:24 AM
Stephen Kitt
 
Default Minified javascript files

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 23:48:32 +0100, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 07:50:39PM +0000, Sam Morris wrote:
> > tcltrf (source)
> > * win/msvcrt.dll
> >
> > This is part of Windows. I don't expect Debian has been granted
> > permission to distribute it.
>
> It's the run-time library for Microsoft Visual C++ and is, as I
> recall, distributable along with applications that are built using
> that compiler. In fact, it is *recommended* to distribute it with
> applications. However, various applications bundled with Windows also
> need it, so in practice you can get away without doing this if you're
> sure your application doesn't depend on any newer features.

Since Windows 2000 and Visual C++ 7, msvcrt.dll is part of Windows and isn't
redistributable; the redistributable runtimes carry a version number in their
name (msvcr71.dll etc.) and are supposed to be redistributed within their own
installer (vcredist.exe and co.). The DLL included in the tcltrf source is
older though (version 5 corresponds to Visual Studio 97) and dates back to a
time when it was supposed to be redistributed (albeit restrictively, see
below)...

See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/abx4dbyh%28v=vs.110%29.aspx for
detais on current versions of Visual C++.
http://kegel.com/wine/isv/visual-studio-6-EULA.html is a copy of the Visual
Studio 6 which would be similar to that covering the DLL in tcltrf. Section 4
covers the distribution requirements; in particular, we're supposed to limit
others' distribution rights so the DLL can't be redistributed outwith the
accompanying software requiring it. I doubt it could be considered DFSG-free
by any interpretation; what's more tcltrf's source is already repacked so
removing the DLL shouldn't be too onerous.

I've filed a bug; it might affect oldstable too, I'll check later.

Regards,

Stephen
 
Old 08-18-2012, 09:40 AM
Andrey Rahmatullin
 
Default Minified javascript files

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 04:43:51PM +0600, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:03:23PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > > So yes, we have the problem for precompiled windows DLLs in a source
> > > package.
> >
> > Interesting, that issue seems rather common. Maybe a lintian check
> > could alarm packagers of this?
> http://lintian.debian.org/tags/source-contains-prebuilt-windows-binary.html
I hereby suggest rewording the description and/or raising the severity of
this tag.

--
WBR, wRAR
 
Old 08-18-2012, 05:46 PM
"Bernhard R. Link"
 
Default Minified javascript files

* Raphael Hertzog <hertzog@debian.org> [120817 14:04]:
> That way, there's no need to strip unused RFC, minified javascript, Flash files,
> PDF without sources, etc.

Striping them away is only the forth best solution. There are some better
solutions like:

- make upstream include the sources
- include the sources yourself
- make upstream not include files without source

That might not always be easy, but it's not different from getting any
other fixes upstream.

> All this has been useless bureaucracy which has drawn people away.

If people are drawn away by someone caring for the freedom of our users,
perhaps they are not really a loss. </scnr>

Bernhard R. Link


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120818174632.GA8374@client.brlink.eu">http://lists.debian.org/20120818174632.GA8374@client.brlink.eu
 
Old 08-18-2012, 06:06 PM
Jakub Wilk
 
Default Minified javascript files

* Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgquiles@elpauer.org>, 2012-08-17, 13:39:
3) Make a new source package containing every jQuery version existing
in the wild, then build depend on that.

FTP Masters do not like that solution.


Interesting. Do you have any evidence for that?

--
Jakub Wilk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120818180649.GA8196@jwilk.net">http://lists.debian.org/20120818180649.GA8196@jwilk.net
 
Old 08-18-2012, 07:18 PM
Vincent Bernat
 
Default Minified javascript files

❦ 18 août 2012 19:46 CEST, "Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org>*:

>> That way, there's no need to strip unused RFC, minified javascript, Flash files,
>> PDF without sources, etc.
>
> Striping them away is only the forth best solution. There are some better
> solutions like:
>
> - make upstream include the sources
> - include the sources yourself
> - make upstream not include files without source
>
> That might not always be easy, but it's not different from getting any
> other fixes upstream.

The difference is that we need to bug upstream about a file that we
won't even use. There is no real bug (not even a licensing issue). We
request him to add a file that we won't use anyway. I don't know many
upstream who have so much free time.

>> All this has been useless bureaucracy which has drawn people away.
>
> If people are drawn away by someone caring for the freedom of our users,
> perhaps they are not really a loss. </scnr>

If the chosen solution is to repack (which does not involve arguing with
upstream about it), I don't really see what difference it will make on
the freedom of our users to keep or not such a file.

We are talking about unused files whose license allows redistribution.
--
Don't compare floating point numbers just for equality.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
 
Old 08-18-2012, 11:33 PM
Pau Garcia i Quiles
 
Default Minified javascript files

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
> * Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgquiles@elpauer.org>, 2012-08-17, 13:39:
>
>>> 3) Make a new source package containing every jQuery version existing in
>>> the wild, then build depend on that.
>>
>> FTP Masters do not like that solution.
>
> Interesting. Do you have any evidence for that?

I'll look for the mail (maybe my memory fails) but even if FTP Masters
accept that as a solution, it looks insane to me: if every package
which build-depends on jQuery needs to include the full jQuery source,
why do we build-depend on jQuery at all?

--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKcBokvCF=JUhfuAd41DXmUTbXjrbZHYkWNLQ+nkTs_r+K5m0 A@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 08-19-2012, 01:11 PM
"Bernhard R. Link"
 
Default Minified javascript files

* Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> [120818 21:18]:
> The difference is that we need to bug upstream about a file that we
> won't even use. There is no real bug (not even a licensing issue).

They are distributing files without source, so everyone else can either
not just easily modify it or verify if it really does what it is
supposed to do. This is definitely a shortcoming in what upstream ships
and really something you should bug upstream about.

> We request him to add a file that we won't use anyway.

There is more than just "us". If it is for us, they could just remove
the file. It's for the people that those files is supposed to be for.
They should have the right to change it, for which they effectively
need the source.

> I don't know many upstream who have so much free time.

If just adding a source file they hopefully have anyway or to remove
a file does not take much time. (There is a lot of unmaintained
software out there, but as I said, not much difference to getting
any other patch in).

Bernhard R. Link


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120819131132.GA9171@client.brlink.eu">http://lists.debian.org/20120819131132.GA9171@client.brlink.eu
 
Old 08-19-2012, 01:49 PM
Vincent Bernat
 
Default Minified javascript files

❦ 19 août 2012 15:11 CEST, "Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org>*:

>> The difference is that we need to bug upstream about a file that we
>> won't even use. There is no real bug (not even a licensing issue).
>
> They are distributing files without source, so everyone else can either
> not just easily modify it or verify if it really does what it is
> supposed to do. This is definitely a shortcoming in what upstream ships
> and really something you should bug upstream about.

The source is one link away. People wanting the source just have to
click on the link in the header of the minified version. As for
verification, having the source next to the minified version does not
guarantee anything about the minified version, all the more that we
don't have currently in Debian Wheezy a reliable minifier.

>> We request him to add a file that we won't use anyway.
>
> There is more than just "us". If it is for us, they could just remove
> the file. It's for the people that those files is supposed to be for.
> They should have the right to change it, for which they effectively
> need the source.

Your use case is inexistant. Regular people needing the source will grab
it at http://jquery.com.

>> I don't know many upstream who have so much free time.
>
> If just adding a source file they hopefully have anyway or to remove
> a file does not take much time. (There is a lot of unmaintained
> software out there, but as I said, not much difference to getting
> any other patch in).

No, upstream usually don't have the source. They download the minified
version from jQuery website. And no upstream will remove a file that is
useful for 99.999% of his users just to please one Debian maintainer.
--
Modularise. Use subroutines.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
 
Old 08-19-2012, 05:44 PM
Russ Allbery
 
Default Minified javascript files

Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> writes:
> ❦ 19 août 2012 15:11 CEST, "Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org>*:

>> They are distributing files without source, so everyone else can either
>> not just easily modify it or verify if it really does what it is
>> supposed to do. This is definitely a shortcoming in what upstream ships
>> and really something you should bug upstream about.

> The source is one link away. People wanting the source just have to
> click on the link in the header of the minified version. As for
> verification, having the source next to the minified version does not
> guarantee anything about the minified version, all the more that we
> don't have currently in Debian Wheezy a reliable minifier.

Right.

Debian's current policies here aren't exactly wrong. In an ideal world,
we would indeed always provide source next to everything, and that's a
good goal. But this is a very hard sell upstream, whose immediate
reaction is "There are copies of the unminified source of jquery all over
the net -- you can't throw a rock without hitting one! Why am I
responsible for shipping the 48,194th copy?" There really isn't any
feasible scenario in which someone wanting to modify the package can't
find the relevant source (*provided* that they haven't modified jquery or
the similar Javascript library first before minimizing it, but that's
quite rare).

--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87a9xqepzo.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87a9xqepzo.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 08-19-2012, 06:10 PM
Simon Josefsson
 
Default Minified javascript files

Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> writes:

> ❦ 19 août 2012 15:11 CEST, "Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org>*:
>
>>> The difference is that we need to bug upstream about a file that we
>>> won't even use. There is no real bug (not even a licensing issue).
>>
>> They are distributing files without source, so everyone else can either
>> not just easily modify it or verify if it really does what it is
>> supposed to do. This is definitely a shortcoming in what upstream ships
>> and really something you should bug upstream about.
>
> The source is one link away. People wanting the source just have to
> click on the link in the header of the minified version. As for
> verification, having the source next to the minified version does not
> guarantee anything about the minified version, all the more that we
> don't have currently in Debian Wheezy a reliable minifier.

That seems problematic -- so even if the source is shipped, there is no
way to re-build the minified file?

/Simon


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87boi64ut2.fsf@latte.josefsson.org">http://lists.debian.org/87boi64ut2.fsf@latte.josefsson.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:33 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org