On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Florian Festi <ffesti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> >> For those cases, 2 approaches exist: >> >> 1) let all packages which provide such a plugin own the directory, they >> install a plugin/add-on to (This is the approach, which is being applied for >> packaging perl-modules) >> >> This approach, however is only functional when all packages providing such >> "plugins/add-ons" obey such a convention. >> >> 2) split out the plugin/add-on package into a separate package and let >> this spit-out package depend on the "base-package". > > There is a third possible approach: > > Split out the plugin dir into a separate package and let > plugin/add-on packages depend on it. > That is actually a very good idea. That way, you can even script the following query: "which functionality do I have plugins for?" by doing rpm -qa \*-filesystem or whichever common naming convention we settle on. Regards, -- miʃel salim • http://hircus.jaiku.com/ IUCS • msalim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora • salimma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx MacPorts • hircus@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
