After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 530645 - Don't use /etc/lsb-release
Don't use /etc/lsb-release
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-lirc-properties
Classification: Other
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Mathias Hasselmann (IRC: tbf)
Mathias Hasselmann (IRC: tbf)
Depends on:
Blocks: 530359
 
 
Reported: 2008-04-29 23:10 UTC by Bastien Nocera
Modified: 2008-06-30 14:28 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Bastien Nocera 2008-04-29 23:10:36 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #530359 +++

We should add some detection of the include support in the configure script instead, and do away with that huge dependency (the LSB support has a lot of dependencies, which makes it inappropriate for a LiveCD for example).

My latest include patch is pending merge upstream.
Comment 1 Murray Cumming 2008-04-30 07:50:32 UTC
I don't understand what LSB has to do with lirc's include support.
Comment 2 Mathias Hasselmann (IRC: tbf) 2008-04-30 08:11:21 UTC
@Murray: g-l-p uses /etc/lsb-release to figure out wheither if /etc/lirc/lircd.conf should be overwritten, or if just an include statement should be added.

@Bastien: "huge dependency"? /etc/lsb-release is less then 100 bytes usually and AFAIK its the only reliable method to identify a Linux distribution.

Yes, probably a configure check would be better, but I have absolutely no idea how such a check would look like. lircd doesn't seem to have a dry-run mode for only checking a configuration file. Also checking the version string isn't reliable.
Comment 3 Murray Cumming 2008-04-30 08:17:09 UTC
Ah, so we just use lsb-release to detect the distro name and version.

A --enable-lirc-includes configure option (defaulting to checking lsb-release) seems like the only realistic solution for now.
Comment 4 Bastien Nocera 2008-04-30 10:04:17 UTC
The package that contains /etc/lsb-release in Fedora will drag all the dependencies necessary for LSB support, which is a lot of pretty useless stuff.

Removing the dependency altogether and requiring a version of lirc with the patch seems like a better option to me. I can understand the check if the patch wasn't going to get upstream, but I updated the patch just for that reason, so we wouldn't have to check this.
Comment 5 Murray Cumming 2008-04-30 12:11:43 UTC
I guess we worry that there would be no way to know that lirc lacked support for gnome-lirc-properties until run-time, and it would be difficult to make sense of the problem at that time.
Comment 6 Bastien Nocera 2008-04-30 13:25:05 UTC
$ lircd --version
lircd 0.8.3pre2

We can use that at run-time, or at configure-time. It puts the onus on package maintainers to make sure they depend on a new enough version of lircd.
Comment 7 Murray Cumming 2008-04-30 13:25:55 UTC
Yeah, when it gets into lirc.
Comment 8 Mathias Hasselmann (IRC: tbf) 2008-06-30 14:28:19 UTC
LSB dependency has been removed with fixing bug 532606.