On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
Workaround of that bug is one line of code, it just has not been accepted yet.
And this is the core of the problem. No one has been spending 5 minutes on fixing prelink, yet people have described hours and days of effort wasted because of prelink. If the people who deem prelink useful can't ensure prelink does not cause damage to people with no interest in prelink, the package should go.
Therefore I made IMO a more real world measurement with: time gdb/configure
Unfortunately I have to admit that does not mean much.
I do not know the FIPS prelink issues to be able to talk more about it.
rpm uses prelink -y so it already works in most cases and the rare cases can be fixed in prelink. The problem is its maintainer Jakub has more significant work to do nowadays.
I agree there remains some work on prelink itself and some packages around to make prelink relevant again
I don't mean to pick a fight with you Jan, but you are the only person actively defending prelink right now. When even you reach the above conclusions and cannot put in the time, and the maintainer isn't looking at filed bugs for over a year, the only real answer is to turn prelink into a dead.package for now. Paul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
