11:39 a.m.
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a bundled
library permitted under this condition,?
Regards,
Chen Lei
10:21 p.m.
On 02/12/2010 04:39 AM, Chen Lei wrote:
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a bundled
library permitted under this condition,?
This seems like a classical case of a missing library to me
=> Generally speaking, you should submit the missing library for
inclusion into the distro first.
Whether adding this "lzma-sdk" to Fedora makes real sense in Fedora is a
different question, because there already is a lzma library in Fedora
(packages lzma and lzma-devel).
Ralf
10:56 p.m.
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora
doesn't have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Fedora 12 has package lzma-libs which is generated by lzma-4.32.7-3.fc12.src.rpm.
Perhaps you should confer with the maintainer of the Fedora lzma package
if you desire a later lzma version (such as 4.65, 9.07 beta, or 9.10 beta.)
-----
http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/lzma/devel/lzma.spec?revision=1....
Source0: http://tukaani.org/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.lzma
-----
--
12:40 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:39:02 +0800,
Chen Lei <supercyper(a)163.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a bundled
library permitted under this condition,?
We have an out of date version that isn't getting updated upstream and
we have a replacement library that uses a different API but which can
probably do what you want with some wrappers.
I have an interest in this as well as the development version of squashfs
tools uses the latest SDK and won't directly work with either current
library.
Bundling it wouldn't be permitted.
Personally I'd like to see it replace the old lzma stuff, since xz provides
compatible utility programs and I don't think anything else is likely to
be using that library. Having three libraries doing almost the same thing
seems excessive.
5:57 a.m.
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
We have an out of date version that isn't getting updated
upstream and
we have a replacement library that uses a different API but which can
probably do what you want with some wrappers.
I have an interest in this as well as the development version of squashfs
tools uses the latest SDK and won't directly work with either current
library.
Bundling it wouldn't be permitted.
Personally I'd like to see it replace the old lzma stuff, since xz
provides compatible utility programs and I don't think anything else is
likely to be using that library. Having three libraries doing almost the
same thing seems excessive.
Yeah, please package the LZMA SDK as lzma-sdk, the sooner we can get an
LZMA-enabled squashfs, the better! (The KDE spin could really use the saved
space!)
Kevin Kofler
2:44 a.m.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Chen Lei wrote:
Hi all,
I want to package a sofware using a bundled lzma sdk which fedora doesn't
have(http://7-zip.org/sdk.html).
Since I realized no linux distribution containing lzma sdk yet, is using a
bundled library permitted under this condition,?
Just for the record, we have a SevenZip package, which contains the
java part of the sdk from the above link. If you want to make a more
comprehensive package, let me know so that we can do the
obsoletes/provides/retirement in coordination.
Orcan
5188
days inactive
5188
days old
5 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Bruno Wolff III -
Chen Lei -
John Reiser -
Kevin Kofler -
Orcan Ogetbil -
Ralf Corsepius