Hello everyone, cc'ing Paul Slootman (maintainer of rsync since 2003) as he might help me here,
For reference, bug log on BTS: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=949712 On Sun, 26 Jan 2020 at 17:29, Cyril Brulebois <k...@debian.org> wrote: > Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> (2020-01-26): > > I'm also not sure whether it would make sense to add also an acl-udeb > > binary package, which would match for example the attr-udeb one. > > Does rsync really depend on libacl in the first place? I'm seeing > --disable-acl-support in its configure.ac; I haven't had to toy with > rsync in rescue mode just yet, so I'm not sure how imperative it would > be to have ACL support there… > > (I don't mind the acl udeb addition anyway, just putting some > ideas/options on the table.) I appreciate the suggestion, I assumed that it would be a simple workaround, but tried to make use of "--disable-acl-support", "export enable_acl_support="no"" and "--enable-acl-support="no"" (which I assumed would work, by looking at configure.sh and configure.ac) and rsync-udeb still ends up being linked to libacl1. Maybe support for that flag is broken, or I missed something. My initial assumption was that having libacl-udeb wouldn't cause a considerable overhead, while having the benefit of shipping an rsync-udeb which supports the same features as the regular one (total size of rsync binary is around 500kb). I reckon Guillem mentions acl-udeb would match the already existent attr-udeb package, but I don't know how rsync deals with both libs and how they cap its features exactly, since it seems that libattr1 is only used in some archs (hppa, m68k, powerpcspe, sh4, sparc64). I can say that having support for ACLs on rsync-udeb would help in a scenario where the user wants to do a full copy of the files, maybe copying the whole system's FS with its ACLs along. Paul, what do you think about this? Could you take a brief look at what I did[0] and confirm if there's actually an upstream issue with regards to disabling ACL support? Could you also share your opinion on the importance of providing rsync-udeb with ACL support? Guillem, please give me a heads up in case you think this is a good argument for providing libacl1-udeb, in such case I will stop investigating how to build rsync without having it symlinked to the lib. debian-boot: also ping me in case I should stop cc'ing the list. Thanks everyone, [0] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/rsync/-/tree/debian/udeb-729069 -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
