Le 16/06/2013 12:28, Michael Schwendt a écrit :
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:35:44 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
>> However, the reviewer said that this package should follow how was
>> packaged in oter distros.
>
> That's somewhat unusual.
>
I don't say that.
I mostly encourage to use a sub-folder of /usr/include instead of simply
drop the headers in the main /usr/include dir
And in that case "serf-1" (used in other distro seems a good choice)
> While we've got naming guidelines, which sometimes make it plausible to
> use package names that are used by other dists already, spending time on
> examining other dists' packages on where they store header files is
> beyond the scope of packaging for Fedora.
Yes.
But looking outside fedora is always interesting.
We don't need to reinvent the wheel.
Lot of us use path from debian or other distro.
Other distro also take patches from our repo.
> This depends on where dependencies expect these headers to be found.
> Do they evaluate the serf-1.pc pkgconfig --cflags to retrieve a custom
> search path for headers? Do external sources include the headers via
> standard search path, i.e.
Definitively, pkg-config output is the right way.
I only know about pecl/http which use an awful solution
if test -f "$i/include/serf-0/serf.h"; then
SERF_DIR=$i
SERF_VER=0
elif test -f "$i/include/serf-1/serf.h"; then
SERF_DIR=$i
SERF_VER=1
fi
> Here you should append %{?_isa} just like for the base package Requires.
> But are all these really required?
How could I have miss that.... :(
Remi.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
