[Mageia-dev] Standardising the virtual Provides in -devel packages

Fri Jul 8 19:02:29 CEST 2011

Le vendredi 08 juillet 2011 à 17:27 +0300, Anssi Hannula a écrit :
+> On 08.07.2011 07:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
+> > Hello.
+> > 
+> > I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
+> > in the distro, there should be:
+> > Provides: %{name}-devel
+> > Provides: lib%{name}-devel
+> > 
+> > either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
+> > packages, so that we don't have to check urpmq --provides all the
+> > time. Personally, I am more inclined on having them both, so as not to
+> > break already working specs.
+> > 
+> > For example:
+> > $ urpmq --provides lib64gudev1.0-devel-166-5.mga1.x86_64
+> > libgudev-devel[== 166-5.mga1]
+> > pkgconfig(gudev-1.0)[== 166]
+> > devel(libgudev-1.0(64bit))
+> > lib64gudev1.0-devel[== 166-5.mga1]
+> > lib64gudev1.0-devel(x86-64)[== 166-5.mga1]
+> > 
+> > only libgudev-devel, so if I put BR gudev-devel in a spec it won't
+> > work, whereas I'd expect it to work since some other packages have
+> > such similar provides:
+> > $ urpmq --provides lib64dbus-1-devel
+> > libdbus-1-devel[== 1.4.1-3.mga1]
+> > libdbus-devel[== 1.4.1-3.mga1]
+> > dbus-devel[== 1.4.1-3.mga1]
+> > [...]
+> > 
+> > 
+> > WDYT?
+> > 
+> > (If we agree to go one way or the other, will just fix them gradually
+> > over time).
+> 
+> I remember having this discussion in Mandriva when we dropped %major
+> from devel name. As a result the library policy (which we have on Mageia
+> as well) was altered so that all packages should have
+> - name-devel
+> - tarballname-devel
+> as provides, i.e. without lib%name-devel (except for existing pkgs).
+> This is what I've been using for any new packages I've packaged.
+> 
+> However, as usual, I'm fine with any consistent scheme (one or the other
+> or both).
+
+I would be in favor of keeping the compatibility with existing
+practice. 
+
+
+-- 
+Michael Scherer
+
+