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.
Hey,
So I've got 4 new addons built and in the process noticed that apr and apr-util are both not included as separate packages. I think that httpd makes use of them but provides the sources bundled which seems to go against what you recommend above. Like for instance, in Debian apr and apr-util are both provided as modular separate packages. So this is what I did while playing around. I built two addons for both apr and apr-util because subversion also has those as dependencies. I then specified --with-apr and --with-apr-util to my newly added apr and apr-util packages when ./configure'ing subversion. It all builds nicely and I'm just waiting on my clean/build to test packages on my live IPFire box.
Long story, but I'm curious about why apache makes used of bundled third party sources here, is this a special case that requires to go against what's encouraged?
For the record, I don't believe that something like subversion belongs to a nice trimmed down firewall OS, but I needed it for quick checkout of sources on my box and thought it might be occasionally useful.
Regards,