Hi,
On 09/03/2009 06:29 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Hans de Goede (j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx) said:
It really is like having to support gentoo, versus having to support a
distro using pre build packages. And I would really like to move to the having to
support a pre-build package model for the initrd.
The problem is this:
The kernel binary RPM contains this pre-built initrd. The kernel source
RPM does not contain the sources necessary to make this pre-built initrd.
This makes me rather uncomfortable from a Licensing perspective.
True, but we do provide SRPMS with the sources, if we include a list of
the SRPMS with the sources, with full NEVR in the kernel rpm as doc,
wouldn't that be sufficient?
Not really. In the case of initrd-built-with-kernel, it could be packages
in the buildroot that never leave koji for release/updates, and are then
garbage collected.
Only if one and the same package gets rebuild twice in a day, and between
those rebuilds a kernel get build. Or a package from updates-testing gets
tagged into the buildroot override and then never becomes stable.
Note that we have the same problem with any package which does static linking
against an lgpl library (such as glibc). Actually if the kernel rpm contains
nevr's of the packages used, a package which does static linking against an
lgpl library will be a bigger problem as there we are not telling the user
which exact version to get to get the library sources used.
And if we have the NEVR as used during build, we can always regenerate the
srpm from CVS + the lookaside cache.
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
