Re: [PATCH] configure: Check bzip2 is available

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:01:16PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 11/08/19 11:28, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > The bzip2 tool is not included in default installations.
> > On freshly installed systems, ./configure succeeds but 'make'
> > might fail later:
> > 
> >     BUNZIP2 pc-bios/edk2-i386-secure-code.fd.bz2
> >   /bin/sh: bzip2: command not found
> >   make: *** [Makefile:305: pc-bios/edk2-i386-secure-code.fd] Error 127
> >   make: *** Deleting file 'pc-bios/edk2-i386-secure-code.fd'
> >   make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > 
> > Add a check in ./configure to warn the user if bzip2 is missing.
> 
> We've come full circle. Let me explain:
> 
> > 
> > Fixes: 536d2173b2b
> 
> So this makes me kinda grumpy. If you look at the v3 posting of the patch that would later become commit 536d2173b2b:
> 
>   http://mid.mail-archive.com/20190321113408.19929-8-lersek@redhat.com
> 
> you see the following note in the changelog:
> 
>     - compress FD files with bzip2 rather than xz, so that decompression at
>       "make install" time succeed on older build OSes too [Peter]
> 
> So I couldn't use xz because that was "too new" for some build OSes, but now we also can't take bzip2 for granted because that's "too old" for some other build OSes? This is ridiculous.

We're not saying bzip2 is too old / missing from the OS. Every OS we care
about has bzip2. The problem is that a minimal installation migt not have
installed it. This kind of problem is increasingly common with use of
minimal container images for example. So we're just ensuring we validate
that what we want is actuall present.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|