hi guys, we want to package libbpf and I'd like to coordinate with you on some issues I've met on this: 1) I think libbpf should be part of kernel-tools-libs and kernel-tools-libs-devel, which would look like below (from early rpm build): $ rpm -qpl kernel-tools-libs-5.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /usr/lib/.build-id /usr/lib/.build-id/ca /usr/lib/.build-id/ca/654da1e5ea553f985e28b8d98ad24e51f19e88 /usr/lib/.build-id/f6 /usr/lib/.build-id/f6/a788b316f26fbe70db47bfc0ef500348117023 /usr/lib64/libbpf.so.0 /usr/lib64/libbpf.so.0.0.1 /usr/lib64/libcpupower.so.0 /usr/lib64/libcpupower.so.0.0.1 /usr/share/licenses/kernel-tools-libs /usr/share/licenses/kernel-tools-libs/COPYING $ rpm -qpl kernel-tools-libs-devel-5.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /usr/include/bpf/bpf.h /usr/include/bpf/btf.h /usr/include/bpf/libbpf.h /usr/include/cpufreq.h /usr/include/cpuidle.h /usr/lib64/libbpf.a /usr/lib64/libbpf.so /usr/lib64/libcpupower.so Do you see libbpf as a standalone package or kernel-tools-libs* wuold be ok for you? 2) There's already bcc-devel's libbpf library packaged: $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libbpf.so bcc-devel-0.8.0-1.fc28.x86_64 so there's a conflict.. any chance we could rename libbpf to something else like: libbpf2.so libbpfobject.so libbpfbest.so ...? I checked and I think those 2 conflicting libraries don't make a valid case for using 'alternatives'. Also the libbpf.so from bcc-devel has been there for some time so we can't just remove/rename it.. ;-) thoughts? thanks, jirka
