On 04/07/2014 05:31 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 07/04/14 15:54, Honza Horak wrote:
On 04/07/2014 03:51 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On 07/04/14 14:43, Honza Horak wrote:
On 04/03/2014 09:14 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:53:04 +0200
Honza Horak <hhorak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/03/2014 11:20 AM, H. Guémar wrote:
Since AGPL is fedora-compliant license, there's no blocker to get
libdb6 into packages collection.
Besides, libdb5 is still critical for many packages (like RM), until
we get rid of it, I can only agree with your proposal.
Maybe, it's still time to rename the current libdb => libdb5 and get
newer releases named libdb starting F21
This would be possible only by co-operation with the depended
packages, since they usually use "BuildRequire: libdb-devel". So
after just rebuilding those to link against libdb-6, some of the
packages would start to suffer from license incompatibilities. But I
agree that libdb-6.x + libdb5-5.x scenario looks better than
libdb-5.x + libdb6-6.x.
Anyway, to make some marketing for this change, we should have a Self
contained change page for this [1]. Change Proposals Submission
Deadline is 2014-04-08 btw.
[1]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes
It's not a self-contained change really. Without a good deal of
co-ordination it'll end up causing problems like
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768846
in which there are symbol conflicts when a process ends up trying to
load two different versions of libdb.
I understand and agree that there is a risk of some issues, but the
issues won't have platform-wide influence imho, so this doesn't seem to
me like that we need to take this update as a system-wide change, if
you
meant that.
It's a bit borderline I think. It doesn't affect the whole platform but
quite a number of otherwise unrelated packages will need updating to
libdb-6, in particular rpm, httpd, any httpd modules and their
dependencies that are affected, sendmail etc.
This thread misses one important information. This change is not only
about changing license from GPL to AGPL, but there is also a change in
version, since libdb-6 is AGPLv3+ (change from GPLv2+).
So, updating of the components won't happen in all cases that simple,
since for some of them the upgrade would mean to introduce license
incompatibility (components that are GPLv2 only like RPM).
That means that some of the packages will need to stay with libdb-5 or
will start link against some other GPLv2+ alternative.
Does libdb-6 have the same symbol names as libdb-5? If so, there's
probably not a lot of packages that can be built with libdb-6 without
the possibility of causing symbol conflicts with others built against
libdb-5 (which can't be updated for license reasons).
Good question. Jan, can you investigate it, please?
Honza
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
