On 9/4/06, Matthias Saou <thias@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote : > Jesse Keating wrote: > > Forwarding this here too. > > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > From: Alexander Larsson <alexl@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reply-To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers > > <fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers <fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: devel packages with only one .pc file > > Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 15:11:26 +0200 > > > > I've recently got several bugs against package involving basically > > splitting out only one pkg-config file into a -devel package, because > > the packaging guidelines says so. I've done this for a couple of > > packages, but its starting to get very ridicolous. > > > > The one-file -devel package is totally useless > > I would tend to agree, a single .pc file -devel pkg is a bit silly. > Perhaps the existing rule: > > - MUST: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package. > > probably ought to be amended. Well, if the .pc file has its cflags or libs show that the package requires other libraries (some X libs, or gtk stuff, or...), then it does make sense to split the -devel package out, since it will not just contain one file, but also other -devel package requirements that we definitely don't want to be forcing on all simple users of the runtime bits.
+1 This has been discussed before and it was decided that a .pc file should be in a devel package even if it is the only file in the package for the reason given by Matthias. And I don't see it being worth the effort to try and come up with exceptions to the rule. There is barely any overhead involved in creating a single file devel package (AFAIK). -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
