[Fedora-packaging] No pre-built applications rule

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Sun, 2006-09-17 at 07:53 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-16 at 22:08 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > It's come to my attention that we don't have a "Packages must be built
> > from source, no precompiled binaries" rule in the current guidelines.  I
> > think this is an oversight as the Binary Firmware section:
> > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BinaryFirmware
> > 
> > implies this for the specific case of firmware.
> > 
> > How about something like:
> > 
> > "Packages must be built from source code.  Including pre-built programs
> > or libraries is strictly forbidden.  A select few exceptions are made
> > for binary firmware.  Please see
> > http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BinaryFirmware
> > for details."
> > 
> > And on ReviewGuidelines:
> > "Must: The package must be built from source.  No pre-built programs or
> > libraries are acceptable."
> -1
> 
> > Thoughts, opinions welcome.
> 
> IMO, both rules above are a mistake.
> 
By both, do you mean the sections for Packaging/Guidelines and for
Packaging/ReviewGuidelines or the new proposal and the pre-existing
BinaryFirmware Guidelines?

> In my understanding the original intend was to force "rebuildability" on
> LINUX code, i.e. all Linux code to be open-sourced.
> 
> I.e. you'd first have to define what you understand as "Linux code".
> 
> A native firmware to be applied by a running Linux kernel would
> definitely qualify as such. But a firmware (as being applied by
> emulators)

I'd place this under the BinaryFirmware Guidelines so it's not covered
in this new guideline.

>  or foreign libraries (as being required by cross compilers)
> are cornercases.
> 
Meaning the libraries built for the foreign architecture?  So these do
not execute on the host OS?  If that's the case, then it could be
considered data for the cross-toolchain rather than a library or
program.  I haven't thought about that case enough to know if that's a
good idea or not, though.

If it's a special build of a library that the cross toolchain uses to
run on the host OS, then I think it does need to be rebuilt from source.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060917/85235fd7/attachment.sig>