Dne 20.12.2012 15:46, Rex Dieter napsal(a):
On 12/20/2012 02:40 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 20.12.2012 01:43, Garrett Holmstrom napsal(a):
>> On 2012-12-19 5:12, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>> Vít Ondruch (vondruch(a)redhat.com) said:
>>>> Can somebody enlighten me, what is the purpose of ruby(abi) (replace
>>>> by python(abi) if you wish) virtual provide? Especially, why Ruby
>>>> packaging guidelines mandate "Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.9.1",
i.e.
>>>> versioned require? And why in Python packages, python(abi) is
>>>> automatically generated?
>>>
>>> In the python case, it's because that python extension modules
>>> install in a version-specific directory ($libdir/python2.7, for
>>> example.)
>>> This makes them explicitly tied to that version of python.
>>
>> There's also the fact that the ABI for the bytecode that gets
>> generated at build time is specific to each x.y series of python
>> releases.
>
> For that, you could have "Require: python-libs = 2.7" instead.
What's the practical difference?
You follow general practices? You don't have to think if
{ruby,python}(abi) makes any sense for {JRuby,Jython} and what version
it should provide in comparison to {ruby,python}. You don't force people
to ask why Ruby 1.9.3 has ruby(abi) = 1.9.1. You don't have to answer
such question as what is {ruby,python}(abi) good for?
Vít
-- rex
--
packaging mailing list
packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging