Hello Tibbs, thx for the mail. Sorry, I couldn't attend yesterday as we had a working holliday and I was absent from the pc. *g* On Thu, 25 May 2006, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > I have updated http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PHP with the > results of the discussion. I have also included a log of the IRC > discussion for those who would like to see the full rationale. To answer a few points from the discussion: [17:11] <spot> do we really need the additional naming scheme? [17:12] <spot> does the end user care if it is PECL or PEAR? Probably. A pear package can be easier included than a pecl package. Consider a web-developer working on his machine. He has to create an app, running on $random webserver, probably a shared host. He needs support for foo, which is available as pecl or pear. He would choose pear, as it means he doesn't need root on the final webserver but in the worst case can just extract the tarball in the webroot. And about the naming conflicts: It's possible. The pear and pecl projects are not sharing the same namespace. Thus a conflict could occur, even though I haven't looked into the matter if there are already conflicting names. [17:14] <tibbs> cweyl: Do you happen to know what the upstream tarballs look like for each type of module? The upstream Tarball is not prefixed by anything, so we can't just blindly follow upstream. [17:19] * spot idly wonders how nice it would be to get a php (abi) define in the core php package I have no idea how often the php-abi changes. But it would sure be nice to depend on a specific abi version. Icing on the cake would be if the buildsystem would automatically enqueue the packages depending on a specific abi version, whenever the abi changes. e.g. new httpd/php/whatever update, the buildsystem enqueues the packages depending on it. [17:31] <spot> each package should Provide: php-FOO = %{version}-%{release} [17:31] <spot> this way, we should catch the yum install php-FOO case +q [17:42] <spot> cweyl: i don't suppose the PEAR modules identify what php they need, do they? [17:43] <cweyl> spot: typically in the README/install, or on pear.php.net They do that. Quite detailed even. Each package on pear/pecl has a list of requirements. For PECL::Package::gnupg this looks like the following: Dependencies Release 1.2: PHP Version: PHP 4.3 or newer Release 1.1: PHP Version: PHP 4.3 or newer Release 1.0: PHP Version: PHP 4.3 or newer For PEAR::Package::HTML_Progress2, it's a bit more: Dependencies: * PHP Version: PHP 4.2.0 or newer * PEAR Package: PEAR Installer 1.4.3 or newer * PEAR Package: HTML_Common 1.2.1 or newer * PEAR Package: Event_Dispatcher 0.9.1 or newer * PHP Extension: gd * PEAR Package: PHP_Compat 1.4.1 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: PEAR Installer 1.3.5 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: HTML_QuickForm 3.2.4 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: HTML_QuickForm_Controller 1.0.4 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: Image_Color 1.0.1 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: HTML_Page2 0.5.0 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: HTML_Template_IT 1.1 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: HTML_Template_Sigma 1.1.2 or newer (optional) * PEAR Package: Log 1.8.7 or newer (optional) This is detailed enough to feed rpm with a nice list of Requires to satisfy. Anything else I forgot? regards, andreas -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
