[Bug 1356048] Review Request: rtlsdr-scanner - Frequency scanning GUI for RTL2832 based DVB-T dongles

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1356048



--- Comment #20 from Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #19)
> (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #18)
> > (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #17)
> > > (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #16)
> > > > (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #15)
> > > > > (In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #12)
> > > > > > (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #11)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Why it should provide its own license file? The docs are licensing under the
> > > > > > same license as the main package and it's dependent on the main package,
> > > > > > from the doc:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Both this document and the RLTSDR Scanner is licensed under the GNU General
> > > > > > > Public License version 3 (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html).
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > According to [1]:
> > > > > > > If a subpackage is dependent (either implicitly or explicitly) upon a base
> > > > > > > package (where a base package is defined as a resulting binary package from the
> > > > > > > same source RPM which contains the appropriate license texts as %license),
> > > > > > > it is not necessary for that subpackage to also include those license
> > > > > > > texts as %license.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ah sorry, I didn't seen the dependency. But does it really need main package?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > %package doc
> > > > Summary: Documentation files for rtlsdr-scanner
> > > > Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
> > > > BuildArch: noarch
> > > > 
> > > > Requires is the explicit dependency, i.e. you cannot install the doc
> > > > subpackage without the main package.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I understand but why? :)
> > 
> > Sorry, are you joking or what?
> 
> -doc sub-package provides a PDF file only, it does not need base package.
> 
> Just for example:
> 
> 'gle-doc' (that contains PDFs and license) does not depend by 'gle'
> 
> $ repoquery -l gle-doc
> /usr/share/doc/gle-doc
> /usr/share/doc/gle-doc/GLEusersguide.pdf
> /usr/share/doc/gle-doc/gle-manual.pdf
> /usr/share/licenses/gle-doc
> /usr/share/licenses/gle-doc/LICENSE.txt
> 
> $ repoquery --requires gle-doc
> #No output

Well, sorry I cannot imagine situation when you would need doc sub package and
not the main package, according to the Fedora Packaging Guidelines [1]:

> Subpackages are often extensions for their base package and in that
> case they should require their base package.

It's talking about extension of the package, not extension of the
functionality, so the documentation counts.

And from the Package Review Guidelines [2]:

> SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package
> using a fully versioned dependency

I would recommend you reading the guidelines.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]