Hello,
I sent this on the devel list, nobody responded.
ltsp5 requires an xdmcp server, but more than one package provides the functionnality. What about adding a virtual provides for local servers like
Provides: server(xdmcp)
This could also be used for smtpdaemon and webserver, which would become server(smtp) and server(web) (or server(http))?
What do you think about that idea?
-- Pat
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 23:52:55 +0200 Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr wrote:
What do you think about that idea?
My immediate reaction is that it adds more and more Provides that tools have to process, making things slower and slower. It also gets us into the game of "shortest name wins" once more with these things, but maybe that's not a problem per se.
Why don't you work up a proposal on the wiki to consolidate all these things like 'web-server' that you want to change to a more commonly used server(web), generate a list of all the packages that would have to be changed both for provides and for Requires, propose a time for the work to be done, etc.. Treat it almost like a Feature page.
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 10:11:28PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 23:52:55 +0200 Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr wrote:
What do you think about that idea?
My immediate reaction is that it adds more and more Provides that tools have to process, making things slower and slower. It also gets us into the game of "shortest name wins" once more with these things, but maybe that's not a problem per se.
The aim is not to add more virtual provides, but have a consistent naming for the proivdes such that there is a rule to find out the virtual provide name.
My proposal is therefore like:
When a program provides a server listening on a given port, and a virtual provide for that functionality is neeeded, the corresponding provide should named server(port_name), port_name being the official name of the port, as in /etc/services.
Why don't you work up a proposal on the wiki to consolidate all these things like 'web-server' that you want to change to a more commonly
As there is no common naming scheme I can't say what other virtual provides exist beside smtpdaemon and webserver.
used server(web), generate a list of all the packages that would have to be changed both for provides and for Requires, propose a time for the work to be done, etc.. Treat it almost like a Feature page.
I was gathering opinions before doing that.
-- Pat
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:36:00 +0200 Patrice Dumas pertusus@free.fr wrote:
The aim is not to add more virtual provides, but have a consistent naming for the proivdes such that there is a rule to find out the virtual provide name.
My proposal is therefore like:
When a program provides a server listening on a given port, and a virtual provide for that functionality is neeeded, the corresponding provide should named server(port_name), port_name being the official name of the port, as in /etc/services.
That seems somewhat reasonable, how often do names change or get added to /etc/services?
Why don't you work up a proposal on the wiki to consolidate all these things like 'web-server' that you want to change to a more commonly
As there is no common naming scheme I can't say what other virtual provides exist beside smtpdaemon and webserver.
We have them in perl like perl(Make::Maker) or in python python(abi), we have it in rpm itself rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1. I think there is enough evidence out there that foo(bar) is the defacto standard for virtual provides that are more complicated than a single name or library.
used server(web), generate a list of all the packages that would have to be changed both for provides and for Requires, propose a time for the work to be done, etc.. Treat it almost like a Feature page.
I was gathering opinions before doing that.
Chicken, meet egg? (:
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Jesse Keating -
Patrice Dumas