On 07/06/2011 01:57 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote: > Farkas Levente schreef op za 02-07-2011 om 18:21 [+0200]: >> On 07/01/2011 06:26 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote: >>> Farkas Levente schreef op di 28-06-2011 om 10:56 [+0200]: >>>> hi, >>>> why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything >>>> into mingw-filesystem? >>>> i don't see any rational reason for this. >>> >>> Hi Levente, >>> >>> The most important reason of the existence of this package is to avoid >>> dependency bloat. Here's the dependency tree : >>> >>> mingw-filesystem-scripts >>> | | >>> +----------------+ +---------------+ >>> | | >>> mingw32-filesystem mingw64-filesystem >>> | | >>> +----------------+ +---------------+ >>> | | >>> mingw-filesystem >>> >>> The mingw-filesystem-scripts package contains wrapper scripts and RPM >>> macros which are generic for both the mingw32 and mingw64 targets. For >>> these wrapper scripts and RPM macros it doesn't matter whether >>> mingw32-filesystem or mingw64-filesystem is installed. >>> >>> The mingw-filesystem package used to be an empty package which just >>> contains dependencies on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem. >>> If one wants to install this package, both the mingw32 and the mingw64 >>> pieces will be pulled in. I've just applied a change so that all RPM >>> macros which depend on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem >>> will be bundled with this package (this wasn't the case before). >> >> i'm still not understand. >> suppose that there is no mingw-filesystem-scripts so everything which is >> now in mingw-filesystem-scripts moved to mingw-filesystem and >> mingw-filesystem do NOT require mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem. >> and suppose i only need the mingw32 packages. >> than i've to install all mingw32 pacakges + mingw32-filesystem + >> mingw-filesystem. where is the dependency bloat? >> (while in the current situation i've to install all mingw32 pacakges + >> mingw32-filesystem + mingw-filesystem-scripts. same number of packages >> similar dependencies and imho the former is easier and cleaner. >> >> anyway i already write the spec generator script, but i've got way too >> much work plus my son this week and next week. so probably in the end of >> next week i'll send the first version. >> >> regards. > > Hi Levente, > > After thinking some more about this I decided to drop the > mingw-filesystem package and rename the -scripts package to -base. So > now we've got the mingw-filesystem SRPM which produces 3 binary RPMs: > mingw32-filesystem, mingw64-filesystem and mingw-filesystem-base.
but why mingw-filesystem-base better then mingw-filesystem??? that was my original question too. -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!" _______________________________________________ mingw mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mingw
