I'm currently reviewing a request for Telepathy-Qt4, which currently only provides a static library:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520663
It seems to me there are two different options: - rename package to telepathy-qt4-static -- might cause administrative hassle if and when upstream enables dynamically-linked libraries - keep it as before, and just leave the main package empty. Make -devel virtually Provides: -static. Should the -doc subpackage depend on -devel? Should it be called -devel-doc or -static-doc, or just -doc?
Thanks,
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 19:09 -0400, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
I'm currently reviewing a request for Telepathy-Qt4, which currently only provides a static library:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520663
It seems to me there are two different options:
- rename package to telepathy-qt4-static -- might cause administrative
hassle if and when upstream enables dynamically-linked libraries
This is not really an option. (You, too, can patch the software to build dynamically instead; it often is the least path of resistance.)
- keep it as before, and just leave the main package empty. Make
-devel virtually Provides: -static.
AFAIK this is what is usually done in case there are no shared libraries. Of course the static library can be put in a separate -static package, but then one would have to make the -devel package require it in any case if there is no shared library available..?
Should the -doc subpackage depend on -devel? Should it be called -devel-doc or -static-doc, or just -doc?
In 99.9% of the cases, plain -doc will do. I would break it in parts only if the documentation is ridiculously big, say, like kdelibs-apidocs (281MB compressed, 628MB uncompressed, and still it's in one package!!).
That is: if a user bothers to install -doc separately, then it's assumed that s/he wants to get all the documentation, and is not bothered if there's a bit of something extra on the side.
On Fri, 2009-10-02 at 19:09 -0400, Michel Alexandre Salim
wrote:
I'm currently reviewing a request for Telepathy-Qt4,
which currently
only provides a static library:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520663
It seems to me there are two different options:
rename package to telepathy-qt4-static -- might cause administrative
hassle if and when upstream enables dynamically-linked
libraries
This is not really an option. (You, too,
can patch the software to build
dynamically instead; it often is
the least path of resistance.)
Alternatively, though I prefer the above, if you do keep it static, keep the package/SRPM name telepathy-qt4 and put the libs in a -static subpackage, which should obviate some of the issues later.
- keep it as before,
and just leave the main package empty. Make
-devel virtually
Provides: -static.
AFAIK this is what is usually done
in case there are no shared
libraries. Of course the static
library can be put in a separate -static
package, but then one
would have to make the -devel package require it
in any case if
there is no shared library available..?
Correct.
Should the -doc subpackage depend on -devel? Should it be
called
-devel-doc or -static-doc, or just -doc?
In 99.9% of the cases, plain -doc will do. I would break it in
parts
only if the documentation is ridiculously big, say, like
kdelibs-apidocs
(281MB compressed, 628MB uncompressed, and still
it's in one package!!).
That is: if a user bothers to
install -doc separately, then it's assumed
that s/he wants to
get all the documentation, and is not bothered if
there's a bit
of something extra on the side.
If the docs are small (a few MB or less, YMMV), no subpackage is really needed, though you still can if you want to.
-J
-- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola@fedoraproject.org
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Jon Ciesla -
Michel Alexandre Salim -
Susi Lehtola