On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 11:46 -0700, John Reiser wrote: > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 09:35 -0700, John Reiser wrote: > > > >>Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> > >>>If you think there is any issues that needs to be discussed as part of > >>>Fedora development feel free to do so especially if you are willing to > >>>contribute towards resolving any such problems. > >> > >>Remove elfutils from Fedora Core. > > I just want to jump in here and note that I'm not advocating this. > > So, you're saying that anything which isn't controlled by Fedora > > shouldn't be shipped in Fedora Core? > > > > I guess we might as well stop trying to ship anything then as we don't > > have direct control over *most* of what is shipped. > > Most of those projects have maintainers who respond in a somewhat timely > fashion, and/or a public source tree (CVS, svn, etc.), and/or other > forms of not-just-Red Hat participation. Certainly most Fedora projects > have "upstream." That's fine. What is not fine is a project that just > sits there like a bump on a log despite open Bugzilla issues and > demonstrated interest from "downstream" Fedora. > > > Note that elfutils is directly required by a number of packages within > > Fedora Core and thus can't just be removed > > According to "rpm -qR elfutils" they are [excluding self references]: > libc.so.6 > libdl.so.2 > /sbin/ldconfig > which are all part of glibc. So elfutils can be flushed just by > merging it into glibc. Everybody else uses binutils. Not many > developers have ever used the "eu-" versions of nm, strip, size, > readelf, addr2line. ITYM: [root@entropy ~]# repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps --resolve "elfutils*" | sort -u | grep -v "^elfutils" ddd-0:3.3.11-5.2.x86_64 ltrace-0:0.3.36-4.2.i386 ltrace-0:0.3.36-4.2.x86_64 net-snmp-devel-0:5.3-4.2.x86_64 prelink-0:0.3.6-3.x86_64 rpm-0:4.4.2-15.2.x86_64 rpm-build-0:4.4.2-15.2.x86_64 rpm-devel-0:4.4.2-15.2.x86_64 rpm-libs-0:4.4.2-15.2.x86_64 rpm-python-0:4.4.2-15.2.x86_64 systemtap-0:0.5.4-2.2.x86_64 And, having looked at binutils compared to elfutils and the other libelfs out there, I'd much rather use libelf than libbfd. -- Nicholas Miell <nmiell@xxxxxxxxxxx> -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
