Bug 464478

Summary: Split out lm_sensor libs into a sub package
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Peter Robinson <pbrobinson>
Component: lm_sensorsAssignee: Phil Knirsch <pknirsch>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: 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:
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.