On 02/12/2010 03:11 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
What I was really asking is if there should be a source package so that upx could be built without having a second copy of the SDK in another srpm?
The previous editions lzma442, 443, 449, 457, 458, 459, all required *different* adaptations by upx. So a separate Fedora source package would have been of little value, except possibly as an indicator of the need for a -libs package. But during that time, creating a -libs package appeared to be incompatible with the licensing. [Today "LZMA SDK is placed in the public domain".]
Until someone with enough authority standardizes the library package and its interfaces, and there is evidence that the library will be maintained, then each downstream must fend for itself.
--
John Reiser wrote:
The previous editions lzma442, 443, 449, 457, 458, 459, all required *different* adaptations by upx. So a separate Fedora source package would have been of little value, except possibly as an indicator of the need for a -libs package. But during that time, creating a -libs package appeared to be incompatible with the licensing. [Today "LZMA SDK is placed in the public domain".]
Could we build a lzma-upx-static subpackage out of the LZMA SDK SRPM shipping a lzma-upx.a built with UPX's adaptations and which UPX would BR?
Kevin Kofler