Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)

Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?

-%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
-%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
-%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
-%{_libdir}/libss.a

I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
package, unless anyone needs them.

Michael Schwendt was kind enough to go look and found none,
but I guess consider this last call...

Thanks,
-Eric
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
>
> Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
>
> -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
> -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
> -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
> -%{_libdir}/libss.a
>
> I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
> package, unless anyone needs them.

Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines
quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
development.

--
Pat
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
>
> Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
>
> -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
> -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
> -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
> -%{_libdir}/libss.a
>
> I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
> package, unless anyone needs them.

Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines
quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
development.

--
Pat
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
>>
>> Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
>>
>> -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
>> -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
>> -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
>> -%{_libdir}/libss.a
>>
>> I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
>> package, unless anyone needs them.
>
> Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines

Sure but then e2fsprogs has been doing just that for too long as well ;)

> quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
> development.

For that I'm inclined to drop the libs and people can ask if they need them.

We default to "no," right ...

-Eric
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:36:24 -0600, Eric wrote:

> Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
> >>
> >> Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
> >>
> >> -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
> >> -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
> >> -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
> >> -%{_libdir}/libss.a
> >>
> >> I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
> >> package, unless anyone needs them.
> >
> > Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines
>
> Sure but then e2fsprogs has been doing just that for too long as well ;)
>
> > quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
> > development.
>
> For that I'm inclined to drop the libs and people can ask if they need them.
>
> We default to "no," right ...
>
> -Eric

If you're still following this thread, there's a patch attached, which
is relevant to you.

It removes the virtual -static packages and fixes the scriptlets.

Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package e2fsprogs-libs
Cleanup : 2:vim-minimal-7.2.315-2.fc13.i686 555/658
/sbin/ldconfig: relative path `1' used to build cache
warning: %postun(e2fsprogs-libs-1.41.9-9.fc13.i686) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 16:36:24 -0600, Eric wrote:
>
>> Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>> I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
>>>>
>>>> Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
>>>>
>>>> -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
>>>> -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
>>>> -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
>>>> -%{_libdir}/libss.a
>>>>
>>>> I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
>>>> package, unless anyone needs them.
>>> Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines
>> Sure but then e2fsprogs has been doing just that for too long as well ;)
>>
>>> quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
>>> development.
>> For that I'm inclined to drop the libs and people can ask if they need them.
>>
>> We default to "no," right ...
>>
>> -Eric
>
> If you're still following this thread, there's a patch attached, which
> is relevant to you.

thanks, I just committed the removal but forgot about the provides.

Will fix up.

-Eric

> It removes the virtual -static packages and fixes the scriptlets.
>
> Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package e2fsprogs-libs
> Cleanup : 2:vim-minimal-7.2.315-2.fc13.i686 555/658
> /sbin/ldconfig: relative path `1' used to build cache
> warning: %postun(e2fsprogs-libs-1.41.9-9.fc13.i686) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
>

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Anyone using e2fsprogs static libs?
 

On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 23:16 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 02:59:37PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > I've finally been sufficiently pestered to fix this ;)
> >
> > Is anybody using any of these static libs from e2fsprogs?
> >
> > -%{_libdir}/libe2p.a
> > -%{_libdir}/libext2fs.a
> > -%{_libdir}/libcom_err.a
> > -%{_libdir}/libss.a
> >
> > I'm inclined to just remove them rather than making a -static
> > package, unless anyone needs them.
>
> Packages in fedora using those would have been breaking the guidelines
> quite badly. The issue is whether any user of fedora uses them for
> development.

Historically there was a legitimate need for static versions of some of
these tools (e.g. initramfs before it included libc) but that should no
longer be the case for stuff that's in the distribution today.

Regards,
Bryn.


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel