[arch-general] [Request] Remove libpthread-stubs from packages svn/trunk
Can someone remove libpthread-stubs from packages svn/trunk? The package obviously was removed from the repos a long time ago and tools like pbget would fetch an outdated PKGBUILD.
Am 08.01.2010 17:24, schrieb arch@nezmer.info:
Can someone remove libpthread-stubs from packages svn/trunk? The package obviously was removed from the repos a long time ago and tools like pbget would fetch an outdated PKGBUILD.
While you may be right, such tools must be able to handle packages in trunk that are not in any repo: It might happen that packages are being removed from the repos but kept in trunk for some reason (maybe to be readded later, maybe for some other reason). Other packages might be in trunk because they will be used in the future, but have not yet been added.
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 08.01.2010 17:24, schrieb arch@nezmer.info:
Can someone remove libpthread-stubs from packages svn/trunk? The package obviously was removed from the repos a long time ago and tools like pbget would fetch an outdated PKGBUILD.
While you may be right, such tools must be able to handle packages in trunk that are not in any repo: It might happen that packages are being removed from the repos but kept in trunk for some reason (maybe to be readded later, maybe for some other reason). Other packages might be in trunk because they will be used in the future, but have not yet been added.
Why doesn't Arch ship that package ? It's a single 6 lines file, it cannot hurt anything. I just realized arch patches libdrm to not require it : http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-... But official libdrm still requires it, and that's also what we get if we just clone libdrm git repo (usually needed if you also build git versions of ddx and mesa). I just asked on #dri-devel about it : 18:01 < shining> whats the deal with pthread-stubs ? libdrm requires it (apparently with http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/commit/?id=6df7b0719fe92b718e486c2b87e2... ) but arch kills it (http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-...). do all distrib do that ? 18:03 < pq> shining, it is for non-threaded applications, so that the library does not call into the real pthread library but gets the no-op stubs instead. It is implemented by glibc, so the stubs package is "empty" in that case. 18:04 < shining> pq: is it possible to require it only when glibc is not available/used ? 18:05 < pq> shining, the pthread-stubs package itself handles that. That's why it exists. 18:05 < jcristau> shining: what's the point? what's required is a single .pc file at build time in that case 18:06 < pq> in a glibc system it really installs only a single .pc file, AFAIK 18:07 < shining> jcristau: I guess I will forward that question to arch if its the only distrib doing that :) if no one has a good answer to jcristau question, I will open a bug report.
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Am 08.01.2010 17:24, schrieb arch@nezmer.info:
Can someone remove libpthread-stubs from packages svn/trunk? The package obviously was removed from the repos a long time ago and tools like pbget would fetch an outdated PKGBUILD.
While you may be right, such tools must be able to handle packages in trunk that are not in any repo: It might happen that packages are being removed from the repos but kept in trunk for some reason (maybe to be readded later, maybe for some other reason). Other packages might be in trunk because they will be used in the future, but have not yet been added.
Why doesn't Arch ship that package ? It's a single 6 lines file, it cannot hurt anything. I just realized arch patches libdrm to not require it : http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-... But official libdrm still requires it, and that's also what we get if we just clone libdrm git repo (usually needed if you also build git versions of ddx and mesa).
I just asked on #dri-devel about it : 18:01 < shining> whats the deal with pthread-stubs ? libdrm requires it (apparently with
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/commit/?id=6df7b0719fe92b718e486c2b87e2... ) but arch kills it
(http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-...). do all distrib do that ? 18:03 < pq> shining, it is for non-threaded applications, so that the library does not call into the real pthread library but gets the no-op stubs instead. It is implemented by glibc, so the stubs package is "empty" in that case. 18:04 < shining> pq: is it possible to require it only when glibc is not available/used ? 18:05 < pq> shining, the pthread-stubs package itself handles that. That's why it exists. 18:05 < jcristau> shining: what's the point? what's required is a single .pc file at build time in that case 18:06 < pq> in a glibc system it really installs only a single .pc file, AFAIK 18:07 < shining> jcristau: I guess I will forward that question to arch if its the only distrib doing that :)
if no one has a good answer to jcristau question, I will open a bug report. I only need it for libdrm-git. Actually , It's only a dependency of
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 06:11:40PM +0100, Xavier wrote: libdrm packages in AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=20785
On Fri, 2010-01-08 at 18:11 +0100, Xavier wrote:
Why doesn't Arch ship that package ? It's a single 6 lines file, it cannot hurt anything. I just realized arch patches libdrm to not require it : http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-... But official libdrm still requires it, and that's also what we get if we just clone libdrm git repo (usually needed if you also build git versions of ddx and mesa).
The dependency is killed because it's useless. It's easy to kill, so we do it. If you like to install the package because you want to build stuff from git without killing the dependency from your sources, you're free to install it on your system. I don't see point in maintaining a package with just a 6-line .pc file. That's also the reason why we don't maintain this package in extra or any other binary repository, it's useless.
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
On Fri, 2010-01-08 at 18:11 +0100, Xavier wrote:
Why doesn't Arch ship that package ? It's a single 6 lines file, it cannot hurt anything. I just realized arch patches libdrm to not require it : http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/libdrm/repos/extra-i686/no-pthread-... But official libdrm still requires it, and that's also what we get if we just clone libdrm git repo (usually needed if you also build git versions of ddx and mesa).
The dependency is killed because it's useless. It's easy to kill, so we do it. If you like to install the package because you want to build stuff from git without killing the dependency from your sources, you're free to install it on your system.
Well ok, that's fine...
I don't see point in maintaining a package with just a 6-line .pc file. That's also the reason why we don't maintain this package in extra or any other binary repository, it's useless.
...but I don't buy this argument, there isn't any maintenance and cost involved compared to any other packages. And I feel up to the task, it will take 1 minute of my life, but also save a few minutes of my life for the few times I will have to install the aur package on a new system :) Compared to the many hours I spend talking about random useless stuff, I agree it's not much. I just disagree with the principle "let's kill 6 lines just because we can" but it won't change my life much, so no big deal ! I already forgot about it.
participants (4)
-
arch＠nezmer.info
-
Jan de Groot
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Xavier