Dne 06. 12. 22 v 16:44 Terry Barnaby napsal(a):
On 06/12/2022 10:40, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:On Tuesday, 06 December 2022 at 07:43, Terry Barnaby wrote: [...]My view is that compat versions of the commonly used shared libraries for programs that are used on Redhat7 should be kept available until most people are not producing programs for that system at least +nyears and then I guess Redhat8 once that really becomes a core base platform that external people use. A core list of these (there are only a few) could be kept somewhere and when one is to be depreciated, or users see problems when Fedora is updated, a decision on this can be then made with that info. This would keep the Fedora system relevant for more users needs without too much work.Well, that is still *some* work and someone would have to do it. Are you volunteering?In the case of ncurses, it is really just putting back into the SPEC file that which was removed for F37 plus the extra storage on mirrors for the compat RPM's.If it's "just" that, why don't you do it yourself? Obviously, the current ncurses maintainer decided it was time to drop the old v5 ABI compat libs from the package. However, nothing is stopping you from picking that up and maintaining an "ncurses5" package for as long as you need it. Regards, DominikWell in this case I have created a suitable compat lib, all I did was re-introduce the bits to the SPEC file that removed the building of the compat lib and we are fine. I haven't separated it out from the main ncurses SPEC through and have only done this locally as I have no knowledge of the hoops to create a separate package and that seems like the wrong way to do this in general. I have made this available to others who will be in the same boat.But the purpose of my thread here is a more general Fedora policy question as it affects users of Fedora as to what applications the OS is likely to support. If the policy is to just support Fedora built binaries within the particular version of Fedora and to ignore external and commercial binaries built with say Redhat7 and provide no degree of compatibility so be it, but it would be useful for everyone to know where the land lies and be on the same page. The maintainer of the ncurses package wasn't sure of the policy on this.
I wonder what is this claim based upon? Could you provide a link? And I wonder if there was such policy, would the maintainer changed their mind? I am asking because I don't think that any policy can be enforced unless there is somebody to pickup the work. So in this case, it should be enough to convince the maintainer to revert the changes, shouldn't be?
Vít
In my case, a lack of being able to easily run particular external/commercial programs built for Redhat7 will likely move me further away from working with Fedora (using, reporting bugs, promoting it etc.) as it will be a less useful system for our usage._______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxFedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelinesList Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
