From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D07B61396D0 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 44F981FC1E1; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:28:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from avasout05.plus.net (avasout05.plus.net [84.93.230.250]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3FBC1FC017 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.6.147] ([212.159.46.162]) by avasout05 with smtp id B0Ua1w00d3Vx3VQ010Uc4N; Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:28:36 +0100 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=Iav3YSia c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=RuViaDnnNG9rfPLW4VJocg==:117 a=RuViaDnnNG9rfPLW4VJocg==:17 a=13zjGPudsaEWiJwPRgMA:9 a=AOcyelS_dwJiv3xoSZsA:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=ucpYS4l-MkYuvR8bnqsA:9 a=ONNS8QRKHyMA:10 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.26 and changes with SunRPC, libtirpc, ntirpc, libnsl (NIS and friends), ... To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1577962.20ZSkpDzGI@porto> From: "M. J. Everitt" Openpgp: id=BA266E0525CFAB101523351B4C30334F93C22371 Message-ID: <9d70985f-b94d-29ea-6f9b-d17c2575ec23@iee.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:28:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1577962.20ZSkpDzGI@porto> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="raCkerHfxixmPt2RpHd3DOonTtI0HJNl5" X-Archives-Salt: 13980430-7f82-46c6-b06d-9fd3675d1713 X-Archives-Hash: f05ec351d0710c8169893f46af2a8085 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --raCkerHfxixmPt2RpHd3DOonTtI0HJNl5 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="md8EbnBOLG1kx0iNCW09onEs7a2JNfFRR"; protected-headers="v1" From: "M. J. Everitt" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <9d70985f-b94d-29ea-6f9b-d17c2575ec23@iee.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.26 and changes with SunRPC, libtirpc, ntirpc, libnsl (NIS and friends), ... References: <1577962.20ZSkpDzGI@porto> In-Reply-To: <1577962.20ZSkpDzGI@porto> --md8EbnBOLG1kx0iNCW09onEs7a2JNfFRR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 18/09/17 10:56, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > So glibc-2.26 is already out for some time, but we still haven't keywor= ded it=20 > yet. Why? > > * I want to use the opportunity to make the long-delayed switchover fro= m=20 > glibc-internal SunRPC (long deprecated and outdated) to external=20 > implementations (libtirpc, and possibly ntirpc). > > * The (outdated and deprecated) NIS(YP) and NIS+ support (libnsl) has b= een=20 > removed from glibc (except for a compatibility library that doesnt inst= all=20 > headers), and is now provided by net-libs/libnsl (increased soversion).= > > This mail is mainly about how to best structure the transition. > Comments, suggestions, corrections, feedback welcome. > > 1) About RPC.=20 > > AFACIS there are three implementations: > a) SunRPC, headers in /usr/include, code provided by glibc > b) net-libs/libtirpc, headers in /usr/include/libtirpc, library -l tirp= c > c) (?) net-libs/ntirpc, headers in /usr/include/ntirpc, library -l ntir= pc > > Option a) is going away with sys-libs/glibc-2.26-r1.=20 > Options b) and c) may in addition need headers from net-libs/rpcsvc-pro= to > I haven't done any testing with c) yet, will do so. > a), b), and c) are co-installable. > > My suggestion for an ideal implementation would be that any package tha= t uses=20 > RPC defines useflags: > sunrpc - build against glibc > libtirpc - build against net-libs/libtirpc > ntirpc - build against net-libs/ntirpc > with=20 > REQUIRED_USE=3D"^^ ( sunrpc libtirpc ntirpc )" > If rpc support is optional with useflag rpc, then this becomes > REQUIRED_USE=3D"rpc? ( ^^ ( sunrpc libtirpc ntirpc ) )" > > Since the three options are coinstallable I see no problems with a pack= age=20 > only supporting a subset, but I have no clue how this interacts at runt= ime. > > Of course this "ideal option" is also the most work-intensive. Would a virtual help any? Probably overlooking a good number of factors, but wasn't mentioned yet ... MJE --md8EbnBOLG1kx0iNCW09onEs7a2JNfFRR-- --raCkerHfxixmPt2RpHd3DOonTtI0HJNl5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJZv7v1AAoJEN7KWvRhIveD374P/0g6MnejD0/aJW2sa5qwhztx mQOexBswivAxLmILvpVr9+x58AZuH8OHiT91B3Xgx4aFw/6eOGNRvl9QgztR4DPV ECtgupfVTONSG5Y2CH3p4RL6y9lcAiHvvnrZ1wkO58PHASv/cM38AbplZEpD6H9e OFfBNzWWnUNqDpk5uXN7qRX+c3aItHc4twz1BTGJRKD3nqCgZdjScFtOqWIv5YBz pUJhEnpH9G78JZd3GkYSeiHeemc6IEn1HFb1KC/JegVtc16mrOZfckLtg/dTi/db rEK8bydX0vBt+HrNcegwWB+BmqqKmfk5kRGUbeT5czCH3U5+RtWVX5EEEEGz+/s5 tIS+OnnQUrqntvCwjd1Ncu5DDDIbxo2TZL8YNYh0WKSX9zxH8BfgfqiK5yZHZA1v IEtMEUy2ameBboqQnj97igvY283Cky8Ch8/bMTNJuAwEDwV/4kv55biHMXgcaC5E ndJ66u/tvPcmiz9atDgXfJ8i3vvrAFLUR1uxrmy4p1mtXTPyoD9/0YBI6tnbsKcH U+1F31dierK0MTHp9N+A++GVfhLTJBwWfWYqDGR6lDSrgZN4n+SWgU/aRffeR7qv 7QyF7JbMbIbZBAszcowRdxkA9KTvTg0YH6HeI7wWaoS3hYvfxG03VTh1XoWAWdsM hC7RNo0RhJb+IRin7TI5 =80No -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --raCkerHfxixmPt2RpHd3DOonTtI0HJNl5--