From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53053) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eKm4s-0004IQ-SZ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 09:14:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eKm4o-0000zS-M3 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 09:14:06 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58760) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eKm4o-0000z3-HX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 09:14:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eKm4o-0007gj-8R for guix-patches@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 09:14:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#28398] Xfburn Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <20171129091421.hjqr7prtxlwiuzi5@abyayala> <2046678405415120597@scdbackup.webframe.org> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:13:21 +0100 In-Reply-To: <2046678405415120597@scdbackup.webframe.org> (Thomas Schmitt's message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:40:43 +0100") Message-ID: <87k1y6fse6.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Thomas Schmitt Cc: 28398@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Thomas, "Thomas Schmitt" skribis: > ng0 wrote: >> I've applied your suggestions >> and the ones Christopher had a while back in this new version >> of the patches. > > The inappropriate word "mastering" is still in one of the two description > texts in the libburn patch > >> + (synopsis "Library for reading and writing optical discs") >> + (description >> + "Libburn is a library for reading, mastering and writing optical d= iscs. > > > (It is also still in the description of the current Debian package. But > that's only due to the long release cycle. The next Debian package will > state what is committed by > https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-libburnia/trunk/libburn/debian/c= ontrol?r1=3D428&r2=3D430 > ) For the record, for GNU packages we stick to the GNU description as maintained in the Womb and =E2=80=98guix lint=E2=80=99 makes sure we do: http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/*checkout*/womb/gnumaint/pkgblurbs.txt However in this case our Xorriso description seems to differ. Are you OK with the one in pkgblurbs.txt above? If not, can you provide a suggestion? > GNU xorriso versus libisoburn's xorriso: > > The only known application of libisofs' ACL capabilities is xorriso. It c= an > record ACLs as part of backups and restore them back to disk. Operating > systems are supposed to ignore the ACL info when mounting and reading > libisofs made filesystems. > > Guix currently packages GNU xorriso, which brings own source copies of > libburn, libisofs, libisoburn, and libjte. > > When libburn and libisofs are established as Guix packages and the decisi= on > is made that Debian's Jigdo ISO download mechanism is not desired, one sh= ould > consider to package libisoburn and to install its dynamically linked xorr= iso > binary. Indeed, we should do that. > Reason for the existence of GNU xorriso is mainly that it can be compiled > and installed by a normal user without interfering with system-wide insta= lled > libburn and libisofs. This provides freedom from distro decisions and del= ays. As package maintainers our choice is to *not* use bundled software in such cases, though. Is it the only difference between the two xorrisos? Thanks for your feedback, it=E2=80=99s useful guidance! Ludo=E2=80=99.