Well yeah it is.....if you want to use it that way. There are some
examples of possible ways to this in my tur. (Hint; there is more than one
way to so this.)
Bob Finch
> Yes, subpackages would be nice.. but pacman isn't designed to split
> packages while building.. so it will be a problem for maintainers. I'd
> really like to see pacman (rather makepkg) be able to build split
> packages. I whole heartedly welcome that feature in the build system. It
> will attract more ppl for packaging too.
>
> On Apr 10, 2005 6:02 PM, J�rgen H�tzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the above thread about "removed docs" made me muse about it:
>> sub-packages. Even RedHat/Fedora builds a sendmail-docs sub-package
>> (because they know even the docs wouldn't help most administrators if
>> they run into m4 errors?).
>>
>> But sub-packages are useful for dynamic extensions too. Look at the
>> PHP PKGBUILD:
>>
>> depends=('openssl' 'libjpeg' 'freetype2' 'libpng' 'pam' \
>> 'gdbm' 'libxml2' 'openldap' 'ncurses' 'curl' 'libxslt')
>> makedepends=('apache' 'mysql' 'imap' 'postgresql' 'bzip2'
>> 'smtp-server' \
>> 'gd' 'fam' 'sqlite3' 'unixodbc')
>>
>> 99.9% of people just don't need openldap or ncurses extensions. Just
>> as 99.9% don't need sendmail docs. Sub-packages would reduce runtime
>> dependencies for the core PHP binary package and would allow smaller
>> installations. With more and more PHP extensions to arise, more and
>> more people want them included in the PKG. This will lead to a
>> big-bloat PHP package (when not using sub-packages). What do you
>> think?
>>
>> J�rgen
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> arch mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>>
>
>
> --
> Vinay S Shastry
>
> _______________________________________________
> arch mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
