On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 02:07:15PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Samuli Piippo >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Some of the Qt modules have multiple libs, which prevents debian auto >> > renaming to work correctly. Instead of only having some modules renamed, >> > disable renaming for all Qt module packages, so that all they all are >> > named as ${PN}. > > I don't think this explanation is good enough reason to disable debian > renaming and that's why I didn't take it into master-next yet. > > The original idea was to let qt5 package with libraries coexist with qt4 > ones, I agree that not many people are using this, but on the other hand > few people asked me to provide more granular packages for qt5, so > instead of disabling debian rename everywhere why don't we split the > packages with multiple libs or define LEAD_SONAME where one library is > significantly more important than the rest and the package should be > named after it?
I have mixed feelings about this. I do see the value of splitting it more and I also see why people may want it in less fragmented set of runtime packages. Putting a second thought on this I think I agree with you. The benefits of splitting it more are higher than having less runtime packages. I think we could take a look at the package split done in Debian for inspiration and this would help to reduce many iterations to get this right. What do you think? -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
