On 05/10/2016 09:00 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (10/05/16 08:42), Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> On 05/10/2016 07:24 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>> On (10/05/16 06:40), Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>>> I was thinking this morning again about how we could deal with the 32-bit
>>>> on 64-bit problem. On Fedora 24 and newer, we have the ability to use rich
>>>> RPM dependencies (Recommends: sssd-client.i686 if glibc.i686) That doesn't
>>>> help on older Fedora or RHEL systems though.
>>>>
>>> Fedora 23 has rpm-4.13.0-0.rc1.13.fc23 and it should work well with weak
>>> dependencies.
>>>
>>> Fedora 22 will be EOL in 2 months. (one month after fedora 24 final
>>> release[2])
>>>
>>> So we needn't care much about fedora 22. :-)
>>>
>>
>> I don't particularly care about Fedora 22. I *do* care about RHEL/CentOS 6
>> and 7.
> OK
>
> I think we all agree on separate package for libnss_sss.so.2 :-)
>
> So let's split discussion into two parts
> A) fedora + weak dependencies
> Would that work for you?
> libnss-sss
> Supplements: glibc-common%{?_isa}
>
What I'd really like to do is have sssd-common have the following:
Name: sssd-common
Requires: sssd-clients-nss%{_isa}
Requires: sssd-clients-nss%{multilibarch} if glibc%{multilibarch}
This approach would make it a hard dependency to have the appropariate client
software if glibc was installed.
Unfortunately, that's impossible right now due to limitations in the compose
tools of Fedora (see this[1] thread for an explanation). Also we'd need to
create %{multilibarch} or get redhat-rpm-config to add it as an available
option.
So for now, I think we'd actually need to do:
Name: sssd-clients-nss
Supplements: (glibc-common%{?_isa} if sssd-common)
Otherwise, we would be installing the NSS module unconditionally for all glibc
installations, which is probably not quite what we want.
>
> B) rhel
> IIRC your initial mail you proposed to
> add requirement to sssd-common on require 32 and 64 bit "libnss-sss"
> + remove automatically generated dependencies for libnss-sss.i686
>
> otherwise the installation of sssd-common.x86_64 would install
> 32bit glibc
>
> If yes please file downstream bugs for rhel6 and rhel7.
> I am not sure whether we want to complicate upstream spec file for rhel.
> (It's already complicated enough due to rhel/fedora compatibility)
> Or do you prefer to have such change also in upstream spec file?
>
Maybe it's time to split the usptream spec file into a Fedora-specific one and a
RHEL-specific one. There's still plenty of value in being able to produce a
RHEL-installable set of packages straight from the upstream sources, but you may
be right that keeping all the logic in a single spec file is getting unwieldy.
I'll leave that to you and Jakub to decide, though.
[1]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/Q5LMMPVEORM76IOPGKYS4XJ6VZ2WLAAX/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/[email protected]
