Web lists-archives.com

Re: Embedded library copies - mergerfs

On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 16:43 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Any advise on what should be our take further ?
> You have correctly identified that the embedded library should not be
> used in Debian, and instead the Debian ‘mergerfs’ package should use
> only the first-class Debian ‘libfuse’ package.
> By your description, the upstream code doesn't do that. One obvious
> workaround is to remove the embedded library in the Debian ‘mergerfs’
> package ‘clean’ target, patch the software to instead use Debian's
> packaged ‘libfuse’ library, and maintain that patch in the Debian
> ‘mergerfs’ package, indefinitely.
> There may be some upstream changes that you could suggest which would
> make that easier. Could a bit of refactoring in ‘mergerfs’ allow for
> an
> easily configurable ‘libfuse’ location? Could those changes be made
> acceptable by the upstream developer?

Upstream said that there were many bugs in libfuse, which ultimately
led to fixing them and carrying the library embedded.


From their statement, they may not be interested in root causing issues
in mergerfs with external libfuse. Which effectively may leave Debian
with a buggy version; something I'd not be interested to maintain.

My plan is to let 2.21.0 remain in testing/sid and try newer versions,
only in Experimental. And then see how things progress, both upstream
and downstream.

Given the large number of mailing lists I follow, I request you to CC
me in replies for quicker response

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part