[pkg-bacula-devel] Contribution

[Sven Hartge]

On 18.09.20 14:11, Mario Pranjic wrote:

> As for packaging of libs3 fork and cloud driver, what would be a proper
> location to use?
> Sven, you mentioned:
> /usr/lib/bacula
> /usr/include/bacula
> 
> Would that be something approved by Debian or approval is yet to be
> obtained?

There isn't really something like a central approval instance in Debian
for that sort of thing. Mostly the Debian Policy governs how to process
in cases like this, mainly chapter 8:
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html

But since we are not providing (or more specific: trying to avoid
providing) a public shared library, not all of those conditions from the
policy apply.

Most importantly here is the need to segregate the library and its
headers away from the normal paths where other programs and ld.so can
find them.

So using /usr/lib/bacula (which already contains the other libraries and
plugins Bacula components use) and /usr/include/bacula is the right way
to go here.

Also, if possible, a rename of the library should be done, to further
reduce confusion what it is fore.

> In other words: does it make sense to build it and package it using
> these locations at this stage?

Yes, it does.

> Is there any communication with Bacula Enterprise in regards to
> possibility for them to let the source code for cloud driver to
> community and when than might happen?

The cloud driver *is* available in the community edition. The only (and
this is quite a big "only) hindrance is the usage of a special forked
libs3 to get it working.

Grüße,
Sven.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-bacula-devel/attachments/20200918/c0091090/attachment.sig>