On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:Well, yeah, but that's a bit above and beyond what a packager should do.
> On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 12:12 +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>> personally I would compile twice, once enabling mysql and another time
>> pgsql, and create 2 packages. each package would install a
>> "motion-dbname" binary, and a symlink would allow access via the well
>> known name "motion". Using alternatives would allow a switch between the
>> two.
> The better option would be to make the program use loadable plugins for
> database support.
If he's also an upstream developer, then he should undertake that
addition with his developer hat on; but it's *well* beyond the size of
patch that a Fedora package should be carrying.
In the meantime, separate subpackages sounds like the right plan to me.
One big package would be a bad idea because of all the dependencies
it'd drag in.
regards, tom lane
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Why can't RPM packages have a Requires saying "mysql OR postgresql" or something like that? That would be useful for web packages, especially ones like phpBB, Enano, MediaWiki, and others...
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
