Re: prelink performance gains

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

 



2013/10/17 Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Paul Wouters <pwouters@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>> I agree there remains some work on prelink itself and some packages around
>> to
>> make prelink relevant again
>
>
> I don't mean to pick a fight with you Jan, but you are the only person
> actively defending prelink right now. When even you reach the above
> conclusions and cannot put in the time, and the maintainer isn't looking
> at filed bugs for over a year, the only real answer is to turn prelink
> into a dead.package for now.

There's no reason to kill the package entirely.  Some people still
want to use it despite the current issues.  So just don't install it
by default.  Reducing everything down to absolutes isn't helpful.

And if we get this fixed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841434
those who are using prelink can remove it and end up with a sane system
 
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux