Bug 464478

Summary:	Split out lm_sensor libs into a sub package
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Peter Robinson <pbrobinson>
Component:	lm_sensors	Assignee:	Phil Knirsch <pknirsch>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	hdegoede, pknirsch, rvokal
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-09-30 11:56:13 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	462851

Description Peter Robinson 2008-09-29 12:24:24 UTC

It would be useful to split out the lm_sensor libs into a -libs subpackage that would allow packages that use the lm_sensors libraries to install just the -libs so that it doesn't pull in extra dependencies like perl

Comment 1 Hans de Goede 2008-09-30 11:56:13 UTC

libsensors is useless with having sensors configured which requires sensors-detect. Having a system without perl is as good as impossible anyways, so splitting it up to not Require perl does not make much sense either.

Closing as not a bug.

Feel free to re-open if you think you've got strong (new) arguments to do the split anyways.

Comment 2 Peter Robinson 2008-09-30 12:06:21 UTC

I don't believe attacking my idea of having a system without perl is the best way to deal with this. I believe it should be autoconfigured by hal/dbus and all that group of stuff anyway without requiring a user to run some detection script. One reason to do this would be to allow the installation of net-snmp-utils which in turn requires net-snmp-libs which requires the above mentioned libraries but the net-snmp-utils are useful on their own with out all the other stuff installed because they can be used for snmpwalks of remote systems.

Comment 3 Hans de Goede 2008-09-30 12:26:18 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)
> I don't believe attacking my idea of having a system without perl is the best
> way to deal with this.

I'm not attacking your idea, I'm just saying it isn't a very practical idea ATM. If you really want to pursue this, please do. And when you've tackled the much bigger fish in getting a perl free system I'll gladly revisit this.

> I believe it should be autoconfigured by hal/dbus and
> all that group of stuff anyway without requiring a user to run some detection
> script.

Unfortunately, due to the way it is implemented in hardware, hw monitoring cannot be simply autodetected and configured from something like udev.