[Bug 426752] Review Request: ghc-X11-xft - Haskell binding to Xft
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jul 16 08:22:45 UTC 2009
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond at gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
Flag| |needinfo?(oglesbyzm at gmail.c
--- Comment #24 from Yaakov Nemoy <loupgaroublond at gmail.com> 2009-07-16 04:22:43 EDT ---
What follows is some IRC chatter over two ways of doing it. Let's go with the
latter. Please explicitely BR the -prof and -doc packages where you have
(01.58.36) ( juhp) loupgaroublond: hmm
(01.59.36) ( juhp) sounds "complicated" :)
(02.00.09) ( juhp) if you're going to make -devel require -prof and -doc then
might as well not subpackage ;)
(02.00.49) ( juhp) we also do it for BuildRequires where it counts
(02.01.20) ( juhp) probably we should just drop the switches?
(03.00.20) :: ritek (n=eduardo at 220.127.116.11) has quit ("������")
(09.54.24) ( loupgaroublond) nah, just the issue is to make sure packages build
properly, either that or we have to explicitly require all the appropriate 'non
devel' packages in a 'devel' situation
(09.56.50) ( juhp) yeah in fact most of the subpackaging is pain
(09.57.10) ( juhp) I am still tempted to unsubpackage doc
(09.57.42) ( juhp) loupgaroublond: but i don't get it: if -devel requires -prof
and -doc then how does subpackaging help you?
(10.00.57) ( loupgaroublond) because -devel is only supposed to contain the
bits in the shared libs necessary to compile other packages
(10.01.03) ( loupgaroublond) the ghc-foo contains the shared libs
(10.01.14) ( loupgaroublond) the *-doc has the haddock stuff, and the -prof has
the profiling extras
(10.01.55) ( loupgaroublond) but if you install the -devel package, we're
assuming you need all those other bits too
(10.04.57) ( juhp) why?
(10.05.10) ( juhp) so then we don't need subpackages
(10.05.21) ( juhp) everything should just be in -devel
(10.07.35) ( loupgaroublond) because sometimes you don't want devel?
(10.07.57) ( loupgaroublond) or i'll just tell jochem to include the -prof and
(10.08.20) ( loupgaroublond) anyways, it's a thought
(10.08.25) ( loupgaroublond) there's more than one way to skin a cat though
(10.11.40) ( juhp) maybe I am missing some context
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
More information about the package-review