On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 at 12:50, Sudip Mukherjee <[email protected]> wrote: > - consider that we may need a divorce from the rpm ecosystem. We don't > have a particularly well-established relationship with them, and have > no influence on their roadmap and goals. So maybe we should mark rpm > package format as deprecated, do what we can to ship it in the next > LTS release, and then just remove all of it, and default to ipk. Any > interested party can set up meta-rpm then and maintain it. > > +1 for this. For the next release you can use the "deprecated internal > parser".
I've started a conversation with upstream here as others have asked for that: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2414#issuecomment-1825991703 If any interested party doesn't want the above scenario to become reality, you really do need to go there, and do your best to convince upstream to find alternatives (such as disabling the crypto bits in rpm with a build time switch). Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1871): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1871 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/102780086/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
