On 9/4/06, Matthias Saou
<thias(a)spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>
wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote :
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > Forwarding this here too.
> >
> > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > From: Alexander Larsson <alexl(a)redhat.com>
> > Reply-To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers
> > <fedora-maintainers(a)redhat.com>
> > To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers <fedora-maintainers(a)redhat.com>
> > 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).