Dne 10.7.2012 13:48, Paul Howarth napsal(a):
On 07/10/2012 12:29 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> I noticed that in revised haskell guidelines , there is mentioned the
> ghc-rpm-macros package, which provides macros.ghc file, which in turns
> provides some useful macros for packaging of Haskell packages. In Ruby,
> we provide similar macro files in ruby-devel and rubygems-devel
> subpackages respectively. Perl has their macros directly in the rpm
> package itself.
> This seems to be a bit inconsistent to me. So my question is: shouldn't
> we standardize some best practices with regards of RPM macros? For
> example for Ruby, we placed the macros into -devel subpackages, because
> we believe that it is just development dependency. Any opinions?
Perl has the macros in the main perl package rather than the
perl-devel package because arch-independent perl module builds often
don't need perl-devel - the packaging split is more fine-grained for
perl and tends to become finer with each release as more and more bits
are split out into their own subpackages since they have their own
Thank you for your clarification. Actually, it is similar for Ruby.
Arch-independent packages do not require -devel package because of
build, but because of macros. And I find it more reasonable then to have
/etc/rpm/macros.ruby in my runtime system, where I have no use for this
packaging mailing list