Bug 8175 - Some client link kits are missing
Summary: Some client link kits are missing
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: ThinLinc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Client (show other bugs)
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC Unknown
: P2 Normal
Target Milestone: 4.15.0
Assignee: Pierre Ossman
URL:
Keywords: prosaic, tobfa_tester
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2023-06-19 13:17 CEST by Pierre Ossman
Modified: 2023-06-22 13:06 CEST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Acceptance Criteria:
MUST: * There should be a link kit for every arch that is included in the client bundle * The link kits should include binaries matching their respective names


Attachments

Description Pierre Ossman cendio 2023-06-19 13:17:16 CEST
(broken out of bug 3513)

We've forgotten to ship the link kits for some client platforms. Fortunately, we build all of them, so it's just a matter of getting them on to the bundle.
Comment 2 Pierre Ossman cendio 2023-06-20 10:02:51 CEST
Should be all done now.

> MUST:
> 
>  * There should be a link kit for every arch that is included in the client
>    bundle
> 

Seems so. I have x86_64, armhf, win32, win64 and osx64.

>  * The link kits should include binaries matching their respective names

Yes, according to "file" and "objdump".
Comment 3 Tobias cendio 2023-06-22 13:06:55 CEST
General
===================
Evaluated this bug with client builds #3190 (pre-fix) and #3194 (post-fix).

Using the tools ’file’, ’objdump’, and in certain cases ’ar’, the file formats of the binaries were confirmed to correspond to the name of the link kits. The collection of link kits in the post-fix build also includes armhf and win64 which were previously missing evident in the pre-fix build, thus completing the one-to-one set of client arches and link kits shipped together in the client bundle.

Acceptance criteria
===================
MUST:
✅ There should be a link kit for every arch that is included in the client bundle

Confirmed.

✅ The link kits should include binaries matching their respective names
Confirmed.

Conclusion
===================
Acceptance criteria fulfilled and implementation looks good.

Closing.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.