<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi,<br>
<br>
Do other distros suffer the same issue with library name?<br>
<br>
I still struggle to fully understand relation between Bacula
community and Bacula Enterprise.<br>
Where does the code originate from? Or we are talking about two
separate branches here and independent roadmaps?</p>
<p>I managed to build s3 library yesterday on Debian 10 (system is
running Bacula 9.6.5 from backports) and now I am figuring it out
how to call it from bacula-sd.<br>
I began here: <a
href="https://www.bacula.org/bacula-release-9-6-5/">https://www.bacula.org/bacula-release-9-6-5/</a></p>
<p>Build ends up with structure:</p>
<p>.<br>
├── DEBIAN<br>
│ ├── control<br>
│ ├── postinst<br>
│ └── shlibs<br>
└── usr<br>
├── bin<br>
│ └── s3<br>
├── lib<br>
│ ├── libs3.so -> libs3.so.4<br>
│ ├── libs3.so.4 -> libs3.so.4.1.bac<br>
│ └── libs3.so.4.1.bac<br>
└── share<br>
└── doc<br>
└── libs3<br>
├── changelog.Debian.gz<br>
├── changelog.gz<br>
└── copyright<br>
</p>
<p>build ends up with two packages:<br>
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 54992 Sep 14 20:11 libs3_4.1.bac_amd64.deb<br>
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 55848 Sep 14 20:11
libs3-dev_4.1.bac_amd64.deb<br>
<br>
</p>
<p>And, at the same time, bacula-sd expects
bacula-sd-cloud-driver-9.6.5.so as filename.<br>
I find it weird bearing in mind s3 driver here suppose to be
solely for Bacula purpose.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<br>
--<b><br>
Mario</b></p>
<div class="moz-signature"><b></b><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/14/20 5:33 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:c52375c7-ea9b-f848-a8f9-f0b27157f283@svenhartge.de">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On 14.09.20 16:21, Carsten Leonhardt wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Here starts one of our previous discussions about libs3:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-bacula-devel/2020-June/003017.html">https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-bacula-devel/2020-June/003017.html</a>
I've sent an ITP for it:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=962918">https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=962918</a>
Nobody complained there. The next step would be to create a package good
enough to upload to unstable, or at least experimental. Then the package
needs to clear the NEW-queue by getting approval by the FTP-masters.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
Some hints on libs3 for Bacula:
I tried (privately) to package the library as private library for bacula
in /usr/lib/bacula and /usr/include bacul instead of the normal
/usr/lib/$(ARCH)/ location and change the name to something like
"libbaculas3" but the build system and the sources themselves fought me
every inch.
In the end I gave up because I had reached my limit of knowledge of
packaging libraries.
Why a private library? Because the libs3 Bacula needs is a special fork
by Bacula Systems and there is already a conflicting libs3 in Debian.
Why the rename? To prevent any problems with the linker possibly finding
two different libs3.so in the system, which would lead to problems.
So getting the libs3 code pummeled into a shape to accept its new
location and name would be a first step.
Getting the Bacula source to accept that library is then the second hurdle.
Grüße,
Sven.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>