On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: > On 02/10/2012 07:28 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:14:47AM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Rex Dieter >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 02/10/2012 11:03 AM, Brendan Jones wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have a couple of packages that I'm porting from the CCRMA repo. A >>>>> couple of them list some additional sources that contain only content >>>>> (ie a PDF or audio presets / no binaries). Do I still have to create >>>>> separate SPECS for these files? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Not necessarily. stuff like documentation or customized configurations >>>> make >>>> sense to *not* package separately. >>> >>> >>> Though you want to make a subpackage for docs if they're huge. >>> >> If the docs are huge (or even just large ;-) *and* they release on >> a slightly different timeframe than the programs, you likely want them in >> a wholly separate package. Otherwise end users end up updating one or the >> other needlessly. >> >> (ie: docs and programs packages installed. Update just the program; end >> user >> ends up having to update both packages since the build created new >> versions >> of both.) >> >> -Toshio >> >> >> >> -- >> packaging mailing list >> packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging > > > Thanks all, I believe in the cases I've come up against thus far no separate > package is required as all are tiny. For conf files/default settings I > should use %config(no-replace) right? > For files that go to /etc, yes, that is the default. Meanwhile make sure there are no license issues with the extra sources you are including. Sometimes documentation files have different licenses, I even remember seeing non-free documentation that is for free software. Cheers, Orcan -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
