Summary: | RFE: support for exfatprogs | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Applications] partitionmanager | Reporter: | Mattia <mattia.verga> |
Component: | general | Assignee: | Andrius Štikonas <andrius> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | wishlist | ||
Priority: | NOR | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Platform: | Other | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Latest Commit: | 06f15334ecfbe871730a90dbe2b694ba060ee998 | Version Fixed In: | 21.04.0 |
Sentry Crash Report: |
Description
Mattia
2020-12-28 16:43:11 UTC
In principle I think they can coexist. It would be sligthly messy but definitely doable. My distro is already shipping exfatprogs. (In reply to Mattia from comment #0) > It would be nice to have kpmcore support for exfatprogs now that Linux > Kernel has exfat support. > Though, I don't know if it can co-exist alongside with exfat-utils support > or one exclude the other. For example, they share the same `mkfs.exfat`, but > I don't know if the two implementations use the same syntax. > > Fedora cannot ship exfat-utils, but has recently gained exfatprogs in its > repos. Slightly unfortunately, mkfs.exfat do not share the same syntax. They use completely different command line arguments. I guess I need to detect which one it is by checking commands line flags in mkfs.exfat output. (In reply to Andrius Štikonas from comment #2) > (In reply to Mattia from comment #0) > > It would be nice to have kpmcore support for exfatprogs now that Linux > > Kernel has exfat support. > > Though, I don't know if it can co-exist alongside with exfat-utils support > > or one exclude the other. For example, they share the same `mkfs.exfat`, but > > I don't know if the two implementations use the same syntax. > > > > Fedora cannot ship exfat-utils, but has recently gained exfatprogs in its > > repos. > > Slightly unfortunately, mkfs.exfat do not share the same syntax. They use > completely different command line arguments. > > I guess I need to detect which one it is by checking commands line flags in > mkfs.exfat output. There is an easier way to distinguish those. exfat-utils install mkexfatfs and then symlink it to mkfs.exfat while exfatprogs install mkfs.exfat directly. Fixed in https://invent.kde.org/system/kpmcore/-/commit/06f15334ecfbe871730a90dbe2b694ba060ee998 That was easier than I thought... Keep in mind that you can't just backport this to stable branch because this commit adds a new private member to non d-pointerized class, so this breaks ABI. In master SOVERSION was already bumped from 10 to 11 in some earlier commit. |