From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 135 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2fb5246e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2011-July/006595.html @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Standardising the virtual Provides in -devel packages + + + + + + + + + +

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

+ Ahmad Samir + ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com +
+ Wed Jul 13 12:02:50 CEST 2011 +

+
+ +
On 10 July 2011 10:03, Ahmad Samir <ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com> wrote:
+> On 8 July 2011 06:37, Ahmad Samir <ahmadsamir3891 at gmail.com> 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).
+>>
+>> --
+>> Ahmad Samir
+>>
+>
+> Adding to the above, spturtle has suggested using pkgconfig()
+> provides: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2065
+>
+> --
+> Ahmad Samir
+>
+
+Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
+now, whenever we touch a spec we change to the pkgconfig provides, and
+gradually all the specs will be adapted.
+
+And for the packages that don't have .pc files we add:
+Provides: %{name}-devel = %{version}-release
+Provides: lib%{name}-devel = %{version}-release
+
+or we could add them to all packages whether they have .pc files or
+not, but still always use pkgconfig() provides as BR in our specs.
+
+WDYT?
+
+-- 
+Ahmad Samir
+
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1