Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    20,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Johan S View Post
    I'll be happy to amend the RPM spec file. That is easy, but what should be used, Recommends or Require. As SSL/TLS gets more and more important maybe Requires is the best choice.
    I'm not familiar with the differences between Requires and Recommends and whether a failed Require will abort the whole install.


    Also when I am anyway doing this a Recommends statement for lame an flac might be a good idea
    Lame maybe but not many people need bit rate limiting or transcoding into MP3. IIRC Lame was not bundled with LMS because of licensing - some of these may have expired..

    flac and maybe faad - NO - already bundled and as LMS versions used to be patched for LMS, bundled version are usually best suited - having two version on a system can cause confusion and possibly problems.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by bpa View Post
    I'm not familiar with the differences between Requires and Recommends and whether a failed Require will abort the whole install.
    With Required:

    • rpm --install will fail. This can be overriden with --force.
    • zypper install will print an informational message where it says that a requisites is missing, the user will be given the choice to abort the installation or to "break" LMS and install it without the required package.
    • yum, I don't use yum very often, but I would expect the behaviour to be like zypper's behaviour


    With Recommends

    • rpm --install will install the package. If I have understood the RPM documentation correctly, then the rpm tool does not evaluate the Recommends statements.
    • zypper install will install LMS and the recommended package if the recommended package is available. This behaviour can be overidden by the zypper --no-recommends flag and then the recommended packaged will not be installed.
    • I assume that yum will behave much like zypper.



    Quote Originally Posted by bpa View Post
    Lame maybe but not many people need bit rate limiting or transcoding into MP3. IIRC Lame was not bundled with LMS because of licensing - some of these may have expired..

    flac and maybe faad - NO - already bundled and as LMS versions used to be patched for LMS, bundled version are usually best suited - having two version on a system can cause confusion and possibly problems.
    The Fraunhofer MP3 patents have expired, in the EU since 2012 and in the US in 2017 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3). But if the usefulness is questionable, then it is better anyway best left out.


    Regards, Johan

  3. #13
    I have done some tests for weak dependencies in RPM packages and they confirm that:

    • rpm
      Will completely ignore weak dependencies (Recommends and Suggests and the corresponding reverse Supplements and Enhances)
    • zypper
      Will pull in recommended dependencies if they can be fulfilled but not suggested dependencies. If a recommended dependency can not be fulfilled, then zypper will continue the installation without any further ado
    • yum
      to my surprise yum does not evaluate weak dependencies, i.e it behaves like rpm


    For hard dependencies (Require) all three tools will either immediately fail the installation or ask if the dependency should be ignored.

    In CentOS and RHEL 8 a new package manager dnf is available. As far as I can see from the documentation it will behave more like zypper, i.e. evaluate also weak dependencies. I have not yet had the time to test dnf.

    So far, I would say that if anything should be changed in the RPM, then only the weak dependency "Recommends" would be an option.

    Regards, Johan

  4. #14

    dnf

    So I have now been able to test the new package manager dnf on Centos.

    dnf behaves like zypper, i.e. if a weak dependency (Recommends) is present in the package being installed, and the dependency can be fulfilled, then dnf will pull in that dependency. If the dependency can not be fulfilled, then dnf will just install the original package without any further comments.

    Does anyone have an opinion? Is it worthwhile to add the perl module IO::Socket:SSL as a recommended dependency in the RPM package. There will only be a noticable difference for the ones using zypper or dnf.

    Regards, Johan

  5. #15
    Babelfish's Best Boy mherger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    20,627

    perl-IO-Socket-SSL

    > Does anyone have an opinion? Is it worthwhile to add the perl module
    > IO::Socket:SSL as a recommended dependency in the RPM package. There
    > will only be a noticable difference for the ones using zypper or dnf.


    Yes, please. Whatever simplifies the initial setup.

  6. #16

    Pull request

    Quote Originally Posted by mherger View Post
    Yes, please. Whatever simplifies the initial setup.
    I have created this pull request https://github.com/Logitech/slimserv...tforms/pull/25

    Also I noticed that on CentOS yum is a symlink to dnf, so on any CentOS/RHEL systems newer than version 8 this weak dependency will work.
    On Fedora v22 and on openSUSE/SLES it will also be evaluated.

    Regards, Johan

  7. #17
    Babelfish's Best Boy mherger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    20,627

    perl-IO-Socket-SSL

    > I have created this pull request
    > https://github.com/Logitech/slimserv...tforms/pull/25


    Thanks for all your work on the RPM package configuration!

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by bpa View Post
    Lame maybe but not many people need bit rate limiting or transcoding into MP3. IIRC Lame was not bundled with LMS because of licensing - some of these may have expired..
    I’d say we should Recommend (the RPM equivalents of) anything installed in the container image. At the moment that looks to be lame.

    Note that as well as weak dependencies in the form of Recommends, RPM also has very weak dependencies in the form of Suggests. If we believe that the likes of flac, opus, sox, etc., aren’t useful to the majority of users then we can specify them with Suggests instead of Recommends.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by mavit View Post
    Note that as well as weak dependencies in the form of Recommends, RPM also has very weak dependencies in the form of Suggests. If we believe that the likes of flac, opus, sox, etc., aren’t useful to the majority of users then we can specify them with Suggests instead of Recommends.
    I am not sure that using the very weak dependencies (Suggests and Enhances) will be very useful.

    rpm and yum will of course ignore the "Suggests/Enhances" dependencies.

    Zypper will not install "suggested" packages by default, I actually don't believe there is an option to tell zypper to install "suggested" packages if they are available. Zypper can be used to query the package to see if there are any "Suggests/Enhances" dependencies.

    I don't know how dnf handles these very weak dependencies.

    Regards, Johan

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •