[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mon, 04 Dec 2017 15:06:37 +0100
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)
"Thomas Schmitt" <address@hidden> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> However in this case our Xorriso description seems to differ.
>> Are you OK with the one in pkgblurbs.txt above?
> I'm not sure whether the last sentence could be misleading:
> "xorriso can then be used to copy files directly into or out of ISO files."
> "ISO files" should be "ISO filesystems", in any case.
>> As package maintainers our choice is to *not* use bundled software in
>> such cases, though. Is it the only difference between the two xorrisos?
> Feature- and bug-wise: yes.
> There is the built-in copy of libjte in GNU xorriso, which one would have
> to offer libisoburn at configure-, build-, and run-time, in order to get
> the same capability of creating Debian .jigdo and .template files.
> See also https://www.debian.org/CD/jigdo-cd/
> Name-wise there are problems with some from-source distros which have
> a 1:1 relationship between source package and installed set of binaries.
> They are unable to offer a package named "xorriso" but only its upstream
> package "libisoburn".
> (I could have changed this by splitting up the three upstream tarballs
> into six, some years ago. But i did not like the idea much and my then
> Debian Developer hated it thoroughly. Meanwhile it would cause work in
> too many distros.)
> Afaik, the FreeBSD port of libisoburn is named "xorriso".
> Archlinux has a "Provides:" header where its "libisoburn" package
> advertises "xorriso, xorriso-tcltk".
> Any difference results from automatic creation of GNU xorriso from the
> library sources by
> It makes changes about:
> - Build system files: bootstrap, configure.ac, Makefile.am, version.h.in
> - Documentation files: CONTRIBUTORS, README, COPYRIGHT, COPYING, AUTHORS
> - Program id message and license statement control macro in xorriso/xorriso.h
Thanks for explaining!