Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replace exfat-utils with exfatprogs #1214

Open
Vogtinator opened this issue Apr 6, 2021 · 9 comments
Open

Replace exfat-utils with exfatprogs #1214

Vogtinator opened this issue Apr 6, 2021 · 9 comments
Labels
tracked Tracked elsewhere (Bugzilla, Jira, Trello)

Comments

@Vogtinator
Copy link

exfat-utils was apparently replaced by exfatprogs, and SLE doesn't even have the former.

bmwiedemann pushed a commit to bmwiedemann/openSUSE that referenced this issue Apr 6, 2021
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/883333
by user favogt + RBrownSUSE
- Switch from exfat-utils to exfatprogs, see also gh#yast/yast-storage-ng#1214 (forwarded request 883332 from favogt)
@ancorgs
Copy link
Contributor

ancorgs commented Apr 7, 2021

As far as I can see in a quick check:

  • Leap 15.2 included both exfatprogs and exfat-utils

  • SLE-15-SP2 included none of those two packages (no exfat support at all)

  • Leap 15.3 includes exfatprogs but NOT exfat-utils

  • SLE-15-SP3 includes exfatprogs but NOT exfat-utils

  • Currently Tumbleweed includes both exfatprogs and exfat-utils

So switching to exfatprogs looks like a safe bet. Having said so, do you have any pointer to the explanation about why exfat-utils was dropped in 15.3?

@Vogtinator
Copy link
Author

Having said so, do you have any pointer to the explanation about why exfat-utils was dropped in 15.3?

The explanation is that SP3 already had exfatprogs. So there's not much substance behind that reasoning...

@Vogtinator
Copy link
Author

According to https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/004701d6194c$0d238990$276a9cb0$@samsung.com/, they're both the same project, but looking at git, exfat-utils is something different. At least I'm even more confused now.

@ancorgs
Copy link
Contributor

ancorgs commented Apr 7, 2021

Both packages provide binaries in /usr/sbin with the basic names you would expect (fsck.exfat, mkfs.exfat, exfatlabel) and, thus, the packages conflict with each other.

But there is an important difference. The package exfat-utils also provides symlinks at /sbin for those binaries, while the package exfatprogs only provides the /usr/sbin/ paths. Why is that important? Because as far as I can see, libstorage-ng expects those files in /sbin.
https://github.com/openSUSE/libstorage-ng/blob/master/storage/Utils/StorageDefines.h#L138

So before changing this in yast2-storage-ng, we should adapt libstorage-ng to use the binaries at /usr/sbin, which should be compatible with both packages.

@aschnell Am I right?

@aschnell
Copy link
Member

aschnell commented Apr 7, 2021

Yes, using /usr/sbin should work for both packages. But users setting mkfs option might face compatibility problems since the tools have different options.

@ancorgs
Copy link
Contributor

ancorgs commented Apr 8, 2021

Now tracked at https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1184489 and (for the YaST team) at https://trello.com/c/N7gz5WP0/

@ancorgs ancorgs added the tracked Tracked elsewhere (Bugzilla, Jira, Trello) label Apr 8, 2021
@RokeJulianLockhart
Copy link

RokeJulianLockhart commented Jul 17, 2023

@ancorgs, considering that https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1184489 is RESOLVED FIXED, should this be closed?

@ancorgs
Copy link
Contributor

ancorgs commented Jul 19, 2023

I will check.

@ancorgs
Copy link
Contributor

ancorgs commented Jul 20, 2023

This is only fixed in the libstorage-ng side (which was the critical part). But YaST would still try to add exfat-utils to the selection of packages (unsuccessfully). That still needs to be improved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
tracked Tracked elsewhere (Bugzilla, Jira, Trello)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants