mingw-filesystem-scripts

[Farkas Levente]

hi,
why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything
into mingw-filesystem?
i don't see any rational reason for this.

[Erik van Pienbroek]

Farkas Levente schreef op di 28-06-2011 om 10:56 [+0200]:
> hi,
> why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything
> into mingw-filesystem?
> i don't see any rational reason for this.

Hi Levente,

The most important reason of the existence of this package is to avoid
dependency bloat. Here's the dependency tree :

mingw-filesystem-scripts
                        |     |
       +----------------+     +---------------+
       |                                      |
 mingw32-filesystem                    mingw64-filesystem
       |                                      |
       +----------------+     +---------------+
                        |     |
                    mingw-filesystem

The mingw-filesystem-scripts package contains wrapper scripts and RPM
macros which are generic for both the mingw32 and mingw64 targets. For
these wrapper scripts and RPM macros it doesn't matter whether
mingw32-filesystem or mingw64-filesystem is installed.

The mingw-filesystem package used to be an empty package which just
contains dependencies on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
If one wants to install this package, both the mingw32 and the mingw64
pieces will be pulled in. I've just applied a change so that all RPM
macros which depend on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem
will be bundled with this package (this wasn't the case before).

Kind regards,

Erik van Pienbroek

[Farkas Levente]

On 07/01/2011 06:26 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> Farkas Levente schreef op di 28-06-2011 om 10:56 [+0200]:
> > hi,
> > why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything
> > into mingw-filesystem?
> > i don't see any rational reason for this.
>
> Hi Levente,
>
> The most important reason of the existence of this package is to avoid
> dependency bloat. Here's the dependency tree :
>              mingw-filesystem-scripts
>                     |     |
>    +----------------+     +---------------+
>    |                                      |
>
> mingw32-filesystem                    mingw64-filesystem
>        |                                      |
>        +----------------+     +---------------+
>                         |     |
>                     mingw-filesystem
>
> The mingw-filesystem-scripts package contains wrapper scripts and RPM
> macros which are generic for both the mingw32 and mingw64 targets. For
> these wrapper scripts and RPM macros it doesn't matter whether
> mingw32-filesystem or mingw64-filesystem is installed.
>
> The mingw-filesystem package used to be an empty package which just
> contains dependencies on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
> If one wants to install this package, both the mingw32 and the mingw64
> pieces will be pulled in. I've just applied a change so that all RPM
> macros which depend on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem
> will be bundled with this package (this wasn't the case before).

i'm still not understand.
suppose that there is no mingw-filesystem-scripts so everything which is
now in mingw-filesystem-scripts moved to mingw-filesystem and
mingw-filesystem do NOT require mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
and suppose i only need the mingw32 packages.
than i've to install all mingw32 pacakges + mingw32-filesystem +
mingw-filesystem. where is the dependency bloat?
(while in the current situation i've to install all mingw32 pacakges +
mingw32-filesystem + mingw-filesystem-scripts. same number of packages
similar dependencies and imho the former is easier and cleaner.

anyway i already write the spec generator script, but i've got way too
much work plus my son this week and next week. so probably in the end of
next week i'll send the first version.

regards.

[Erik van Pienbroek]

Farkas Levente schreef op za 02-07-2011 om 18:21 [+0200]:
> On 07/01/2011 06:26 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> > Farkas Levente schreef op di 28-06-2011 om 10:56 [+0200]:
> > > hi,
> > > why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything
> > > into mingw-filesystem?
> > > i don't see any rational reason for this.
> >
> > Hi Levente,
> >
> > The most important reason of the existence of this package is to avoid
> > dependency bloat. Here's the dependency tree :
> >              mingw-filesystem-scripts
> >                     |     |
> >    +----------------+     +---------------+
> >    |                                      |
> >
> > mingw32-filesystem                    mingw64-filesystem
> >        |                                      |
> >        +----------------+     +---------------+
> >                         |     |
> >                     mingw-filesystem
> >
> > The mingw-filesystem-scripts package contains wrapper scripts and RPM
> > macros which are generic for both the mingw32 and mingw64 targets. For
> > these wrapper scripts and RPM macros it doesn't matter whether
> > mingw32-filesystem or mingw64-filesystem is installed.
> >
> > The mingw-filesystem package used to be an empty package which just
> > contains dependencies on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
> > If one wants to install this package, both the mingw32 and the mingw64
> > pieces will be pulled in. I've just applied a change so that all RPM
> > macros which depend on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem
> > will be bundled with this package (this wasn't the case before).
>
> i'm still not understand.
> suppose that there is no mingw-filesystem-scripts so everything which is
> now in mingw-filesystem-scripts moved to mingw-filesystem and
> mingw-filesystem do NOT require mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
> and suppose i only need the mingw32 packages.
> than i've to install all mingw32 pacakges + mingw32-filesystem +
> mingw-filesystem. where is the dependency bloat?
> (while in the current situation i've to install all mingw32 pacakges +
> mingw32-filesystem + mingw-filesystem-scripts. same number of packages
> similar dependencies and imho the former is easier and cleaner.
>
> anyway i already write the spec generator script, but i've got way too
> much work plus my son this week and next week. so probably in the end of
> next week i'll send the first version.
>
> regards.

Hi Levente,

After thinking some more about this I decided to drop the
mingw-filesystem package and rename the -scripts package to -base. So
now we've got the mingw-filesystem SRPM which produces 3 binary RPMs:
mingw32-filesystem, mingw64-filesystem and mingw-filesystem-base.

Kind regards,

Erik van Pienbroek

[Farkas Levente]

On 07/06/2011 01:57 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> Farkas Levente schreef op za 02-07-2011 om 18:21 [+0200]:
> > On 07/01/2011 06:26 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> > > Farkas Levente schreef op di 28-06-2011 om 10:56 [+0200]:
> > > > hi,
> > > > why there is a mingw-filesystem-scripts package and not move everything
> > > > into mingw-filesystem?
> > > > i don't see any rational reason for this.
> > >
> > > Hi Levente,
> > >
> > > The most important reason of the existence of this package is to avoid
> > > dependency bloat. Here's the dependency tree :
> > >              mingw-filesystem-scripts
> > >                     |     |
> > >    +----------------+     +---------------+
> > >    |                                      |
> > >
> > > mingw32-filesystem                    mingw64-filesystem
> > >        |                                      |
> > >        +----------------+     +---------------+
> > >                         |     |
> > >                     mingw-filesystem
> > >
> > > The mingw-filesystem-scripts package contains wrapper scripts and RPM
> > > macros which are generic for both the mingw32 and mingw64 targets. For
> > > these wrapper scripts and RPM macros it doesn't matter whether
> > > mingw32-filesystem or mingw64-filesystem is installed.
> > >
> > > The mingw-filesystem package used to be an empty package which just
> > > contains dependencies on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
> > > If one wants to install this package, both the mingw32 and the mingw64
> > > pieces will be pulled in. I've just applied a change so that all RPM
> > > macros which depend on both mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem
> > > will be bundled with this package (this wasn't the case before).
> >
> > i'm still not understand.
> > suppose that there is no mingw-filesystem-scripts so everything which is
> > now in mingw-filesystem-scripts moved to mingw-filesystem and
> > mingw-filesystem do NOT require mingw32-filesystem and mingw64-filesystem.
> > and suppose i only need the mingw32 packages.
> > than i've to install all mingw32 pacakges + mingw32-filesystem +
> > mingw-filesystem. where is the dependency bloat?
> > (while in the current situation i've to install all mingw32 pacakges +
> > mingw32-filesystem + mingw-filesystem-scripts. same number of packages
> > similar dependencies and imho the former is easier and cleaner.
> >
> > anyway i already write the spec generator script, but i've got way too
> > much work plus my son this week and next week. so probably in the end of
> > next week i'll send the first version.
> >
> > regards.
>
> Hi Levente,
>
> After thinking some more about this I decided to drop the
> mingw-filesystem package and rename the -scripts package to -base. So
> now we've got the mingw-filesystem SRPM which produces 3 binary RPMs:
> mingw32-filesystem, mingw64-filesystem and mingw-filesystem-base.

but why mingw-filesystem-base better then mingw-filesystem???
that was my original question too.

[Erik van Pienbroek]

Farkas Levente schreef op wo 06-07-2011 om 14:09 [+0200]:
> On 07/06/2011 01:57 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> > After thinking some more about this I decided to drop the
> > mingw-filesystem package and rename the -scripts package to -base. So
> > now we've got the mingw-filesystem SRPM which produces 3 binary RPMs:
> > mingw32-filesystem, mingw64-filesystem and mingw-filesystem-base.
>
> but why mingw-filesystem-base better then mingw-filesystem???
> that was my original question too.

I chose that name so it will be more clear to users that the
mingw-filesystem-base package only contains the base files which are
needed for mingw32 and mingw64 support. If all those files were put in a
package named mingw-filesystem it may give users the impression that
this package contains complete support for both mingw32 and mingw64
environments (which it doesn't).

Regards,

Erik van Pienbroek