Issue 109 in s3fs: Debian package
s3...@googlecode.com
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Task Priority-Low
New issue 109 by moore...@suncup.net: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Reference: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/
As s3fs is getting its loose ends tied up, it's getting mature enough to
go "mainstream" with a Debian package.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #1 on issue 109 by moore...@suncup.net: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Filed Intent To Package (ITP) bug with Debian
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #2 on issue 109 by moore...@suncup.net: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Make sure that new package is dependent upon the fuse-utils package. This
(reportedly) is needed for mounting through /etc/fstab to work.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #3 on issue 109 by moore...@suncup.net: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Include "mime-support" package in the dependency list. Needed for the
/etc/mime.types file
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #4 on issue 109 by loic.min...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Hi
I gave a stab at packaging s3fs; I'm attaching the packaging.
Unfortunately, I hit a major issue preventing redistribution:
E: s3fs: possible-gpl-code-linked-with-openssl
N:
N: This package appears to be covered by the GNU GPL but depends on the
N: OpenSSL libssl package and does not mention a license exemption or
N: exception for OpenSSL in its copyright file. The GPL (including
N: version 3) is incompatible with some terms of the OpenSSL license, and
N: therefore Debian does not allow GPL-licensed code linked with OpenSSL
N: libraries unless there is a license exception explicitly permitting
N: this.
N:
N: If only the Debian packaging, or some other part of the package not
N: linked with OpenSSL, is covered by the GNU GPL, please add a lintian
N: override for this tag. Lintian currently has no good way of
N: distinguishing between that case and problematic packages.
N:
N: Severity: serious, Certainty: wild-guess
N:
Indeed, s3fs is GPL and links to openssl.
I could build s3fs successfully against both the openssl and the gnutls
version of libcurl in Debian/Ubuntu but I could not build it against
libgnutls instead of openssl: src/s3fs.h includes openssl headers and
s3fs.cpp uses openssl CRYPTO_LOCK and others.
Would you consider gnutls' libgcrypto instead?
I believe the packaging is otherwise complete; I had to disable the
testsuite as it relies on credential in $HOME, so not suitable for a buildd.
Thanks,
Attachments:
s3fs_1.40-1.debian.tar.gz 1.9 KB
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #5 on issue 109 by ben.lema...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Unless anyone else objects, I'd be happy to give gnutls a shot. I'll see
what I can come up with tomorrow. I'd love to have a debian package!
Thanks!
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #6 on issue 109 by ben.lema...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
whew, openssl reaches quite a few places in s3fs. gnutls appears to have a
compatibility layer
(http://www.gnu.org/software/gnutls/manual/html_node/Compatibility-with-the-OpenSSL-library.html).
i'll keep poking around though, i'm not familiar with either library. If
anyone is feel free to jump in :)
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #7 on issue 109 by moore...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Shouldn't this only affect url=https:... ? Is there a one-to-one
correspondence with the openssl lib calls and the gnutls lib calls? Are
you running into compile time issues? ...or execution time issues?
Admittedly, I'm mostly uneducated in this stuff, but just throwing a few
thoughts out there.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #8 on issue 109 by dmi.cher...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Thanks for the packaging!
It seems that these files to be added to debian/docs file
(so the will be automatically placed to /usr/share/doc/...)
===========
AUTHORS
COPYING
ChangeLog
INSTALL
NEWS
README
===========
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #9 on issue 109 by loic.min...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
INSTALL is obviously not needed; COPYING isn't needed as all the
information is wrapped in debian/copyright which gets installed there;
AUTHORS is of dubious value to end-users on their installed systems; NEWS
is empty; ChangeLog is relatively limited and distros like Ubuntu strip
ChangeLogs away to save space anyway.
Yep, README would be useful
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #10 on issue 109 by carsten....@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Is the openssl issue solved already? I'd like to build a package for debian
too. I already uploaded a package to
http://mentors.debian.net/package/s3fs, but because this is my first debian
package, I'm not quite sure if everything is ok. And I read that mentors
only accepts source packages, and I think mine is a binary package.
Anyway, I'like s3fs and I want to help debian provide a packaged version
for it. :-)
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #11 on issue 109 by ben.lema...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
OpenSSL issue has not been solved, it may not be any time soon. Admittedly,
I'm not very aware of the finer details when it comes to packaging w/ the
SSLeay license. Does it just exclude the package from eligibility in the
Debian upstream?
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #12 on issue 109 by carsten....@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
I'm not sure if this is still an issue. I was able to build a package with
libcurl4-gnutls-dev installed, instead of libcurl4-openssl-dev.
I read that the BSD license of openssl doesn't match with Debians
preference for GPL. but is that still an issue if I can build the whole
thing without openssl?
Maybe I should get a mentor who'll help me build this package and get me
through this issues...
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #13 on issue 109 by m...@micheas.net: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
IANAL, but the quick overview:
Debian's issue is not that it has a preference for the GPL. The problem is
that the advertising/acknowledgement clause of openssl is probably
incompatible with GPL v2 (I don't know about GPLv3)
Debian chooses to error on the side of not linking GPL code to BSD code
that includes the advertising/acknowledgement clause of it's license.
An exception to the sixth clause of the GPL (no additional encumbrances)
can to be added by the s3fs developers to permit redistribution of binaries
linked to openssl.
All the developers of s3fs would have to agree to the exception to the GPL.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #14 on issue 109 by loic.min...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
A good way to deal with the issue is to allow linking against GnuTLS
instead of OpenSSL
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #15 on issue 109 by christop...@ergonlogic.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Has there been any movement on this? With debian-cloud now producing AMIs,
it'd be nice to be able to use S3FS.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #16 on issue 109 by andriyse...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
According to this document
https://people.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl there's a way link
against openssl and distribute packaged version of s3fs. This requires
copyright holders together should agree to add the text mentioned in the
document. The details of how this should be fixed can be found in this
email: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/05/msg00595.html
If above conditions suit you, I can build and add s3fs packages to the
Debian archive.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #17 on issue 109 by ggta...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Hi, all
Thanks a lot.
If you can, please let me know about below case.
If s3fs was modified to be able to use NSS(or GnuTLS) instead of OpenSSL
by "#ifdef", still do we need to add license header in comment in all
sources?
I would add codes for this problem, thereby s3fs can be build with one of
NSS/GnuTLS/OpenSSL.
Becase s3fs should be able to use the library same as libcurl used.
Thanks in advance for your help.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #18 on issue 109 by andriyse...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Let's consider wget as an example of GPL software that can be linked
against both OpenSSL and GnuTLS. Debian distributes only version linked
with GnuTLS that makes possible to distribute it under the terms of GPL
alone. However, it is the source code that _can_ be compiled and linked
together with OpenSSL, so all source files in wget project contain a
license block that permits linking against OpenSSL.
If you wish to leave the possibility for s3fs to be compiled linked
OpenSSL, you should add menioned paragraph to the license and your project
files (having a small copyright and license excerpt at the top of the file
is a rule of thumb anyway).
As for libcurl, it is licensed under a 3-clause BSD license that allows it
to be linked against both OpenSSL and GnuTLS (LGPL v2.1+). If you could use
libcurl alone (i.e without direct linking againt openssl/gnutls) this could
resolve the issue as well.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #19 on issue 109 by ggta...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Hi, andriysenkovych
(I'm sorry about replying for this issue too late)
Today I made new branch as "cryptlibs" on
Github(https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse) for this issue.
(Our s3fs project have moved on github last Dec because googlecodes did not
support download archive.)
The "cryptlibs" branch supports another crypt libraries as GnuTLS and NSS,
and supports OpenSSL yet.
New branch has some new sources which are separated by each crypt libraries.
And configure(.ac) for autoconf appends following four option.
--enable-openssl-lib s3fs build with OpenSSL(default is no)
--enable-nss-lib s3fs build with NSS(default is no)
--enable-gnutls-lib s3fs build with GnuTLS(default is no)
--enable-nettle-lib s3fs build with nettle in GnuTLS(default no)
You can understand first three option, for building s3fs with openssl, nss,
gnutls.
But gnutls and nettle options are complicated.
If you specify only enable-gnutls-lib, it means compiling with GnuTLS +
gcrypt.
If you want to compile with GnuTLS + Nettle, you need to specify both
enable-gnutls-lib and enable-nettle-lib option.
Then, after you run configure script except openssl, you can see
src/Makefile.
It does not link openssl_auth.cpp object which file have all codes for
calling openssl api.
Thus s3fs which make without openssl option does not have any codes which
calls openssl api.
(You can remove openssl_auth.cpp in source codes before building s3fs)
Because s3fs with NSS(or GnuTLS) binary does not have(and call) any openssl
libraries codes, in this case I think that we can exclude it from a license
of OpenSSL.
And I think that we can make debian package(gnutls or nss) without changing
a license of s3fs.
Do you think about this and new branch?
Please let me know about your opinion.
Thanks in advance for your help.
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #20 on issue 109 by ggta...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Hi, all
I updated master branch of s3fs on Github today.
This change is s3fs supports three SSL library(OpenSSL, NSS, GnuTLS).
* And changed configuration options(--with-openssl, --with-nss,
--with-gnutls, --with-nettle) since before.
Thanks,
s3...@googlecode.com
Comment #21 on issue 109 by andriyse...@gmail.com: Debian package
http://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
Hi. It seems project has been moving to github, so I have answered there:
https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/29#issuecomment-50949313
s3...@googlecode.com
Status: Done
Comment #22 on issue 109 by ggta...@gmail.com: Debian package
https://code.google.com/p/s3fs/issues/detail?id=109
I'm going to close this issue because this issue moved on Github.
Regards,