Re: IPFire Building Packages

[Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1705 bytes --]

On Sun, 2014-07-06 at 17:44 +0800, Ghislain Hachey wrote:
> On 7/6/14, 16:57, Michael Tremer wrote:
> > That's what we call bundled packages (very often libraries) and which
> > are extremely discouraged. The problem that comes with that is that when
> > a component gets updated to resolve a certain issue this problem is
> > still in the twenty other copies of the same software. Imagine that for
> > things like Heartbleed. It also consumes space, increases the build time
> > and so on.
> >
> > You should use the provided versions of those tools and libraries or
> > modify them if that is required. All other components that are missing
> > should be created as individual packages.
> 
> Yeah, I understand that. My only fear is that the software in question 
> is including those third party libs as deps because they are needed in a 
> very particular shape (specific versions, some source changes, etc.) to 
> make it all work properly as a whole. I will check with the developers 
> upstream regarding this and if not I will see if I can not modify the 
> build process to include those deps as individual packages in IPFire.

Bundled libs are a real worry and in the case some software requires a
certain version I would consider this software as seriously broken.

There is a reason why we have dynamic libraries and that those are
replaceable. We can easily fix bugs and security issues and those fixes
will get rolled out to the entire system. Therefore it is a must.

I wonder why I cannot find any documentation about this topic on our
wiki...

> Regarding IPFire version 3, If there are specific things I can do to 
> help, sure. I'll go through information in the links to get started.