Send inn-workers mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of inn-workers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Removal of filechan in INN 2.7.0 (Julien ?LIE)
2. Re: innupgrade for old shared libraries?
(Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 13:55:27 +0100
From: Julien ?LIE <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Removal of filechan in INN 2.7.0
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Hi all, and especially users of CURRENT,
I've just removed backends/filechan; it will no longer be present in
tomorrow's snapshot.
innupgrade will change calls to filechan in newsfeeds to "buffchan -u"
(unbuffered mode). If you use filechan in local scripts, you'll have to
update the calls.
I've also added in the newsfeeds sample file an example of use:
# Example of an exploder feed. See buffchan(8) for more details.
foo:news.*:Ap,Tm:buffchan!
uunet:*:Ap,Tm:buffchan!
buffchan!:*:Tx,WGm*:@bindir@/buffchan -f 2
It will generate files named "foo" and "uunet" in <pathoutgoing>,
containing lines like:
news.software.nntp <[email protected]>
comp.sources.unix <[email protected]>
The contents of the files are defined with the "W" flag in the newsfeeds
line.
--
Julien ?LIE
??Il vaut mieux un tapis persan vol? qu'un tapis volant perc??!??
(Ast?rix)
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2021 00:06:39 +0100
From: Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: innupgrade for old shared libraries?
Message-ID: <YZl/fxKy/[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
On Saturday, 20 November 2021 at 08:35, Julien ?LIE wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Shared libraries installed by previous INN versions tend to accumulate in
> the pathlib directory.
> Shouldn't we remove old ones? (keeping only the previous one for instance)
>
> Or should we expect other programs installed on the system, outside INN, to
> go on using old versions of our libraries and therefore we should leave
> them?
>
>
>
> %ls -la
> -rw-r--r-- 1 news news 219K sept. 19 16:17 libinnhist.a
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 1016 sept. 19 16:09 libinnhist.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 sept. 19 16:17 libinnhist.so ->
> libinnhist.so.3.0.4*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 sept. 19 16:17 libinnhist.so.3 ->
> libinnhist.so.3.0.4*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 94K ao?t 8 2015 libinnhist.so.3.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 137K nov. 26 2017 libinnhist.so.3.0.1*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 137K nov. 10 2018 libinnhist.so.3.0.2*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 137K nov. 22 2020 libinnhist.so.3.0.3*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 137K sept. 19 16:17 libinnhist.so.3.0.4*
Libraries with the same SONAME should have backwards-compatible ABI, so
there should be no need to keep old versions.
> -rw-r--r-- 1 news news 1,5M sept. 19 16:17 libinn.a
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 925 sept. 19 16:08 libinn.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 sept. 19 16:17 libinn.so -> libinn.so.6.0.1*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 ao?t 8 2015 libinn.so.3 -> libinn.so.3.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 603K ao?t 6 2015 libinn.so.3.0.0*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 nov. 26 2017 libinn.so.4 -> libinn.so.4.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 718K nov. 26 2017 libinn.so.4.0.0*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 nov. 10 2018 libinn.so.5 -> libinn.so.5.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 718K sept. 20 2018 libinn.so.5.0.0*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 sept. 19 16:17 libinn.so.6 -> libinn.so.6.0.1*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 725K nov. 22 2020 libinn.so.6.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 725K sept. 19 16:08 libinn.so.6.0.1*
Here we have different SONAMEs, so different ABI. In Fedora we usually
keep just one version of a package unless there are very good reasons
like significant portion of consumers not ported to the new ABI. As
upstream you might have a different policy. Keeping one older SONAME
around sounds like a safe policy for upgrades.
> -rw-r--r-- 1 news news 2,1M sept. 19 16:17 libstorage.a
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 987 sept. 19 16:09 libstorage.la*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 sept. 19 16:17 libstorage.so ->
> libstorage.so.3.0.4*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 19 sept. 19 16:17 libstorage.so.3 ->
> libstorage.so.3.0.4*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 746K ao?t 8 2015 libstorage.so.3.0.0*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 949K nov. 26 2017 libstorage.so.3.0.1*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 954K nov. 10 2018 libstorage.so.3.0.2*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 955K nov. 22 2020 libstorage.so.3.0.3*
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 news news 1014K sept. 19 16:17 libstorage.so.3.0.4*
Same SONAME here, too.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
inn-workers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/inn-workers
------------------------------
End of inn-workers Digest, Vol 135, Issue 5
*******************************************
