On 2001. December 5. 22:13, you wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 09:42:37PM +0100, Szombathelyi Gy�rgy wrote: > > Here is the new version of my spec file. This time there are some > > comments: > > Please would it be possible if those who are creating SPEC files for RPM > would create just one common format ? > > How about you would contact those three other persons ? > (if you couldn't find them in the list - I'll search for their emails > myself)
I checked the two other RPMS (I found them on the download page, where is the third?), and I think, the mandrake rpms are good, but too 'mandrakeish'. It's divided into 4 sections: libavifile0.6 for the library, libavifile0.6-devel for the devel files, avifile-player for aviplay and avifile-samples for the other progs. In my SPEC file there are three sections: avifile, avifile-devel, avifile-utils. The big difference is the 'mandrakeized' packages call the main library libavifile0.6, so it's possible to install different versions of avifile (if you release other version than 0.6 :)) on the same system (and it's follows the packaging rules on Mandrake). This is good, when binary compatibilty breaks after a version change, but is's annoying when not. Another difference is the mandrake package names contain the string 'mdk'. The other RPMS (Redhat ones) are too simple. They don't have any devel-packages, only the main avifile and avifile-qt (which is incorrect, because not all programs require qt). So avifile doesn't need one SPEC file, but 2 SPEC files: one for RedHat & Co. (Suse for example), and one for Mandrake. Maybe it's possible to combine the two SPEC files into one. I posted this to the list too, if the other packagers read this, maybe we can discuss our opinions on the secrets of SPEC files. _______________________________________________ Avifile mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://prak.org/mailman/listinfo/avifile
