Heads up: Noarch Subpackages
mw_triad at users.sourceforge.net
Fri Feb 13 17:02:16 UTC 2009
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:28:45AM -0600, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Joe Orton wrote:
>>> I take it from the wiki page, that we should hold of on using this too
>>> aggressively until some distro-wide guidelines are produced?
>>> e.g. for -devel packages given that 99% of the content is generally
>>> noarch-able there would be a lot of scope for splitting those up.
>> ...except for the important symlinks-to-versioned-.so's?
> Right, the symlink and e.g. a pkg-config file are typically the 1% which
> isn't noarch-able.
>> Doesn't that kind of break things for -devel unless you break it into
>> -devel-libs and -devel-headers (eek :-( )?
> Yup, you'd have to do something like that. It's not obviously an "eek"
> to me; it's a trade-off.
Um. Maybe if you name things -devel (arch) which depends on
-devel-common (noarch). But that's still another package I have to
install for just about every -devel :-(.
For some numbers, I have 1296 installed packages, of which 172 are
-devel... so you're talking probably a 10% increase in the number of
installed packages (even if the actual disk usage doesn't change
appreciably) if most -devel packages end up being split. Maybe not
horrible, but that's still a fair number of additional packages.
I'm not convinced that's a good idea, but I suppose it's up to the
maintainers. (I do like the idea of e.g. -doc, though.) Like you say,
it's a trade-off.
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
You are in a dark room. The only exit is a door to the east.
> OPEN DOOR
I don't know which door you mean.
> OPEN EAST DOOR
More information about the devel