Hi,
To me it is a useful feature to be able to easily build .deb packages and make repos to easily update and maintain wireshark across servers. This is a feature I vote for us to keep regardless of any opinion on how Debian build their packages. Maybe a Debian mailing list is a better place to discuss their build system?
Just my 2 cents
Anders
Den ons 20 dec. 2023 23:49João Valverde <
j@xxxxxx> skrev:
On 20/12/23 22:35, Roland Knall wrote:
>
>> Am 20.12.2023 um 22:43 schrieb João Valverde <j@xxxxxx>:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 20/12/23 21:21, Roland Knall wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Am 20.12.2023 um 22:02 schrieb João Valverde <j@xxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 20/12/23 20:52, Roland Knall wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So people can link to our libraries to write other projets? And expect it to work reliably? That is news to me. I have made this question many times over the years but I guess I was not worthy of a clear answer until now.
>>>>>
>>> I am not saying they should do it or that I appreciate it happening. All I am saying is that it happens and is happening and we did not put a stop to it in time. Should they expect it to be reliable? Of course not as I answered also in other threads on this matter. But at the same time I see no point in having them hit a wall face on, rather work in such cases where we know about it, to ensure them moving to a saner approach.
>> What?! I'm back to confused... So you don't like the situation, you say. Here's a thought.. maybe if Debian didn't publish system libraries in our name with these stupid symbol lists then people wouldn't get the crazy idea they could use these libraries that were published for this exact purpose and build their own software on top of it and expect it to work reliable and not break every other release, like most other non-Wireshark Debian libraries.
>>
>> I wonder what could be done about that. I guess Debian would get that clue pretty darn quick if we weren't mirroring their broken setup in our repository, thereby sanctioning it.
>>
>> I don't know, call me crazy. Or did I misunderstand again? Sure seems complicated to get my head around this for such a simple topic as is software release and distribution.
> Just a thought, libvirt was not created by debian but RedHat so the state of debian packaging has nothing to do with them. Debians package is merely moving their approach onto Debian, but the decision to implement libvirts plugin in such a way had been done by RedHats folks.
And what such way is that?! I don't even know why libvirt keeps coming
up in this discussion. They wrote a dissector plugin. That's great. Good
for them. I don't upstream many of my plugins into Wireshark either.
This is something so banal that I am honestly confused why libvirt keeps
coming up as a big boogaloo in this discussion.
I ask again in all sincerity, because I could be misunderstanding, what
is the difficulty created by the libvirt plugin and what does that have
to do with Debian packaging?
>> ___________________________________________________________________________
>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe