On 7/19/2012 6:46 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
Brian K. White wrote:
Ask all the questions you want when you run into things that don't work as expected for you, but understand that at least for now, all problems are the result of lacks in your education, not lacks in the system. All unmet expectations are the result of faulty expectations, not faulty system.
Please don't project your problems on to other people. I've been running and building opensuse for over 10 years. If I install a new version and it doesn't work -- that's my fault for not being educated on the latest changes? or a lack in system compatibility?
I have a engineering degree in computer science, so I tend to know a little bit about computers. Not 'alot', but at least a basic foundation. I've been using linux for about 13 years and building kernels for about 12, so please don't project your reasons for failure onto others.
I predicted (in the part you didn't quote) that you were going to turn out to be a long time linux user and expert that somehow can't figure out how to build a package that anyone else can build. If your claims of missing secret necessary components to software were true, then they'd be true for everyone. Other people can build the packages without any "external" or non-gpl parts. The problem of you not being able to build some package lies with you. Not knowing how to get it working is no crime, everyone has that problem at first. It took me an embarrassingly long time to get my first package building using rpm and then the build service, and then longer to figure out stuff I didn't even know that I didn't know, because that first package wasn't actually correct even though it built. But as a few others have pointed out, when faced with that problem you should have probably started by asking for help instead of wrongly accusing people of violating gpl. After you got that help and got your stuff working and thoroughly understood all the parts that were involved along the way, only *then* would you be in any position to comment on if any part of the process constituted a violation of gpl. You could still be wrong but you would at least be in a position to comment. As someone who does build things, and does have to figure out how to get a current package to build on really old versions of suse, I do know that all the rpm and osc and obs stuff is all just a convenience. There is no violation of gpl. The src rpm for any package includes everything. Not merely the pristine unpatched upstream source, but also all patches that suse applies, and all other information necessary to apply the patches, identify outside dependencies, and build using the underlying standard tools. Further, all software necessary to unpack and examine the src.rpm, build-time dependencies like libraries and include files, and build tools like make gcc, etc.. _and *their* sources_, are all open source and available at the same time and the same place as the src.rpm itself. Using osc or rpmbuild are just conveniences. The reason someone might say in one context that building directly on a normal system, outside of rpmbuild or osc, is "unsupported" isn't because it doesn't work, it's just that it's up to you to handle the zillion possible things that might interfere with any package building that way. No one else can "support" it except by you paying them to debug your system personally. The purpose of the chroot build environments is merely to establish a known quantity. When you run "make" in some source directory, right there from the very first command, the Makefile has no practical way to know which of the dozen different make-compatible programs you might have installed, which one of those might be first in your $PATH, or how it might be configured to behave in ways the upstream auther can't possibly guess that you might do 5 years after they released their tar file. Autoconf and ./configure scripts are huge complex programs that have to do all kinds of work just to try to nail down a thousand details like that. They actually compile entire tiny programs from source to binary to executing the binary, just to find out one tiny detail about the behavior of some function in some library, because there is no sure way to tell from version numbers, and it matters. rpmbuild and osc are only necessary to provide a single known environment that's the same for everyone. Aka a baseline. You are _entirely_ free to disregard them and unpack the src rpm and apply the patches and run the same build commands that rpm would. And if any part of that doesn't work, you are entirely free to debug that the same way everyone had to every time they built anything before rpm or osc existed. You didn't lose anything when they started using automated build tools. If you want to avoid using osc, the work you have to do to build is no harder than it was before osc existed. If your manual build doesn't work the first time out of the box, well neither did most normal builds on any new system before things like rpmbuild and osc started using a consistent fixed defined and isolated environment. When your manual build doesn't work, and you have to debug that, for example, some change you made to your $PATH has placed some program or script named "ranlib" in your path that isn't the same ranlib the upstream author expected, or maybe isn't even a real ranlib at all but some script you wrote and gave a name that you didn't realize would conflict, it's up to you to discover and resolve that. It was _always_ up to you to resolve that. The fact that the package failed to build out of the box in an unpredictable "dirty" environment yet it built fine on the obs, does NOT mean it "requires the external obs and that violates gpl". It just means you have to know how to build software in order to build software. Since you have several times over in this and related recent threads demonstrated that you do not understand this, and other gems like not understanding what "dirty" means in this context but instead took it as some sort of personal insult when it was just a completely standard technical term for an environment that isn't 100% accounted for, you yourself automatically disqualify yourself from being able to claim to be an experienced and skillful builder of software, and so you are in no position to claim that anyone is violating gpl, and in no position to argue with anyone on that topic, let alone people who DO know the material. To end on some shred of a positive note, I bet despite all this, if you wanted, you would still probably get help figuring out what YOU are getting wrong and get your package built and even show you the real answer to any questions you have about how gpl is preserved at all points along the way, if you asked that way. -- bkw -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org