From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53219) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eLrOm-00063L-9t for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:07:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eLrOg-0000UJ-9O for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:07:08 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35773) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eLrOg-0000U9-5i for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:07:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eLrOf-0007nh-PM for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:07:01 -0500 Subject: [bug#28398] Xfburn Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <87k1y6fse6.fsf@gnu.org> <28756780424908815522@scdbackup.webframe.org> Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 15:06:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <28756780424908815522@scdbackup.webframe.org> (Thomas Schmitt's message of "Fri, 01 Dec 2017 17:06:08 +0100") Message-ID: <87bmjeoadu.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 "Thomas Schmitt" skribis: > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> 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? > > 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 fil= es." > > "ISO files" should be "ISO filesystems", in any case. Indeed, fixed. [...] >> 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 > https://dev.lovelyhq.com/libburnia/libisoburn/raw/master/xorriso/make_x= orriso_standalone.sh > 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/xorri= so.h I see. Thanks for explaining! Ludo=E2=80=99.