[Mageia-dev] util-linux vs util-linux-ng

Sat Jul 16 17:53:55 CEST 2011

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:13, D.Morgan <dmorganec at gmail.com> wrote:
+
+> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni at dodonov.net>
+> wrote:
+> > On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 05:33, D.Morgan <dmorganec at gmail.com> wrote:
+> >>
+> >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Eugeni Dodonov <eugeni at dodonov.net>
+> >> wrote:
+> >> > Hi,
+> >> >
+> >> > just wondering, is the switch from util-linux-ng 2.18 to util-linux
+> >> > 2.19+
+> >> > planned?
+> >>
+> >> not yet because nobody proposed or had time, but if you want  this is
+> >> i think the perfect time
+> >
+> > Cool, I can help with that!
+> >
+> > What would be the best solution - import a new util-linux package, with
+> > Obsoletes/Provides for util-linux-ng; or rename util-linux-ng in svn to
+> > util-linux and update the spec?
+>
+> i would prefer a rename, that way we keep the history in the SVN
+>
+
+On further thinking, probably it would be to have it imported it as a new
+package, mostly for 1 reason:
+ - If we rename util-linux-ng, it will break possible updates of it for
+mageia1 (as it will be gone from svn)
+
+Also, I've disabled the loopAES patch which is hopelessly outdated and
+broken and only gets updated sometimes over past years. I think there are
+much better solutions now, and actually I think that we could drop it - but
+I did not wanted to take this decision without additional discussion.
+
+If we should keep it, it can be updated after a reasonable amount of work,
+but it will get broken again with a new util-linux release over and over
+again. So I'd vote for dropping it.
+
+But besides that, util-linux 2.19.1 is there now, I'll try importing it
+today (but with 3g connections it is hard to make promises)..
+
+-- 
+Eugeni Dodonov
+http://eugeni.dodonov.net/
+-------------- next part --------------
+An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
+URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20110716/2a232c31/attachment-0001.html>
+