Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 09:29:37 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> Cc: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libutil in Debian Message-ID: <51DC3A71.5040204@mu.org> In-Reply-To: <CAOfDtXOTqzF9=s%2BUv6%2BMoAu0nrmyGrxJz4xaSJYEfDzRvrKx8g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOfDtXN2fWQAyGNb_ifH9y=zHO%2BGGnSdWnD8C6BzWDTU_7rWFQ@mail.gmail.com> <20130709113553.GP67810@FreeBSD.org> <CAOfDtXOTqzF9=s%2BUv6%2BMoAu0nrmyGrxJz4xaSJYEfDzRvrKx8g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/9/13 8:05 AM, Robert Millan wrote: > Hi Gleb, > > 2013/7/9 Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>: >> With all respect to GNU and Debian the libutil in BSD appeared in 1988, >> and the fact that GNU has taken that name in 1996 isn't reason for BSD >> to change name. > Thanks for pointing this out. > > Please note that my request is only based on practical grounds. It > shouldn't be interpreted as implying endorsement on Glibc's use of > libutil name. > > Historically, Glibc maintainer has been very difficult to deal with. > This has affected non-Linux ports of Glibc as well. In contrast, > FreeBSD community may or may not agree with proposals but is at least > open to discuss things. This (rather than "fairness") is the reason I > try to work things out here and not there. > > Please take it as a compliment rather than as offence :-) > >> Also, FreeBSD is just one of the BSD descendants, and all of them share >> the libutil. > So, I take it that the change I'm proposing could have disruptive effects. > > I do think there are long-term advantages for FreeBSD and the other > BSD descendants in making it easy for their APIs to be deployed > elsewhere. I mean, in terms of portability. > > However I'm clearly biased so I'd rather not insist on this. I leave > it for you to judge. > Robert, I can't promise anything other than maybe a proof of concept in patch form would work? We already do have some utils we have in our base renamed to avoid conflicts such as lib*bsd*yaml. Maybe there's a way to make this work since our system is tightly integrated. Have you looked at what happens with autoconf/automake? How bad does it look from that PoV? Are there a ton of scripts that pull in libutil? Or is that only a small portion of the base? Do you know how to do ports build on FreeBSD to see what breaks? -- Alfred Perlstein VP Software Engineering, iXsystems
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51DC3A71.5040204>