-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
ebuild-writing/bundled-dependencies: new section #377
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
How's it looking now? OK to proceed to content review? And do we want to commit this as-is, or review the content here? Either is fine with me. I guess reviewing the content here is easier because you can comment on the full diff more easily. What I don't want to do, however, is squash any content fixes into the first commit. |
|
I'd say we should continue with content review here. |
|
Let me know when it looks OK and I'll move onto content (I don't want to try fix existing style issues in the first commit once I started that, as cherry-picking that will be hell). |
ulm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Formatting looks good.
I have some tiny comments, admittedly most are into spelling territory (but you might want to fix them now, so they won't interfere with content review later).
|
Thank you! The quick reviews are appreciated, it helps a lot with momentum and motivation. |
ulm
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Formatting LGTM.
laumann
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is good reading 👍
idk if you want examples of packages where upstream does vendor dependencies, but has a mechanism not to use them. media-libs/openjpeg vendors some libraries that Gentoo's packaging carefully removes. At least it's optional to use the vendored versions.
ebuild-writing/bundled-deps/text.xml
Outdated
| are aware that the package is statically linked) | ||
| </li> | ||
| <li> | ||
| If <e>foo</e> bundled local copy of <e>libbar</e>, then they would have to wait |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If foo is a bundled […]
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, if foo bundled a..
Changed to that now.
I've tried to faithfully port the wiki page [0] to the devmanual in this commit, and intend to change the contents as required in followups, to allow easier comparison and to retain provenance. [0] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Why_not_bundle_dependencies Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/300625 Signed-off-by: Sam James <[email protected]>
|
I'm not sure if it fits in the narrative anywhere, but one argument I hear often is "so what, we'll just upgrade the bundled version when it becomes vulnerable." This fails in practice for two reasons:
So the lack of a "vulnerability" in a bundled dependency is truly indicative of nothing. |
I've tried to faithfully port the wiki page [0] to the devmanual in this commit, and intend to change the contents as required in followups, to allow easier comparison and to retain provenance.
[0] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Why_not_bundle_dependencies
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/300625
Note: I'm looking for review of the formatting and porting to the devmanual for now, not whether we should add/adjust content etc (which I will do once the foundation is OK).