Bundling newer 3rd party binaries than are packaged separately

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi all,

I currently package singularity-ce for Fedora and EPEL.

Upstream, we bundle current versions of squashfuse and conmon with our source and own binary packages… because many distros package versions that are too old to work with SingularityCE, and users installing our upstream binary packages just want them to work.

In Fedora & EPEL packaging I disable the building of the bundled squashfuse and conmon in the spec file, and we rely on the distro’s squashfuse and conmon packages.

This is fine with Fedora, and has been okay up until now for EPEL. However, I want to move forward with packaging SingularityCE 4.x for EPEL and there we need a newer squashfuse than is available in EPEL7. Given our user base, leaving EPEL7 without the update wouldn’t be popular, even if it is approaching EOL.

I wanted to verify if whether it's acceptable to bundle a newer squashfuse in the SingularityCE package as a binary under our libexec dir, given that an older squashfuse is provided by an existing squashfuse package? If so, are we required to declare the bundling in the spec file, as we are doing for bundled go deps in the spec?

What has given me pause is reviewing the bundling guidelines at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling - where it seems, at least for libraries, that a `Provides: bundled(<libname>) = <version>` is required… and it’s not really clear to me whether the discussion there about libraries can be directly applied to *executables* that might be bundled?

I note that the apptainer spec / package is already bundling a newer squashfuse binary into its libexec dir without a corresponding Provides: … so perhaps it’s fine to go ahead? Apologies if I have missed prior discussion on this.

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/apptainer/blob/rawhide/f/apptainer.spec
https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/apptainer/apptainer/epel-7.html#files 

And it looks like their next release might be bundling a newer fuse2fs than is in the distro e2fstools package too, plus a newer fuse-overlayfs than is in the distro package:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/apptainer/blob/rawhide/f/apptainer.spec
https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/apptainer/apptainer/fedora-rawhide.html#files


Thanks,

Dave Trudgian



--
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux