On 2003-06-06(Fri) 00:20:13 +0200, Stefan van der Eijk wrote:
> It would be perfect if a -static-devel packages would Require it's 
> -devel counterpart (dependency from the .spec file) and get the rest of 
> the info from the files in the package, like the way the current -devel 
> dependencies work. Is this assumption correct?

Any guru knows?


> But how?
> 
> do the same as with the .so dependencies, but then add a Provides: .a" 
> and "Requires: .a" dependencies?

Probably won't work as expected. Quite some packages only have shared
libraries installed, but not static libraries.


> With the numbers as they are above, quite some -devel packages will need 
> to be split up into -static-devel packages, or the ".a" dependencies 
> will just be added to the -devel packages. Why not move the static-devel 
> packages back into the -devel packages?

I always wondered. The main intention of splitting .a files is saving
space; but actually how much space is saved by not installing .a files?


> - quite some packages containing plugins (gnomegames comes to mind) need 
> to be fixed --> .so's need to be built with -avoid-version?? Of course 
> fixes need to be communicated back to the original projects;

Once I have encountered .la files as modules; when I removed those .la
files, the program prints 'foobar.la is missing'. (my memory is vague now)


> - I'd like to see a comprehensive rpm package dependency (and / or 
> naming) standard be made which is distribution independant. Using 
> dependency information based on capabilities is a step forward. This way 
> we can become less dependany on the actual name a package has. I've 
> proposed the .so stuff in redhat's rpm-list, no response from any rpm 
> developers there. If this doesn't get pushed beyond mdk, it's only going 
> to make the "rpm hell" worse, while it _could_ help solve it;

Probably dependency is never an important subject in all distro; even in
Debian, many dependencies are hand-edited.

Abel


> - the find-provides and find-requires in rpm-4.2-7mdk need to be updated 
> to the latest version. The one in -7mdk doesn't pick up the dependencies 
> in the rpm-devel package. Luckily no -devel package I know of Requires 
> rpm-devel, which makes it less urgent.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Stefan



-- 
Abel Cheung
Linux counter #256983   | http://counter.li.org
GPG Key: (0xC67186FF)   | http://deaddog.org/gpg.asc
Key fingerprint: 671C C7AE EFB5 110C D6D1  41EE 4152 E1F1 C671 86FF

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to