[Mageia-dev] Lib policy change needed ?

[Colin Guthrie]

'Twas brillig, and Anssi Hannula at 15/06/11 18:06 did gyre and gimble:
> On 15.06.2011 19:15, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>> For example look at Amarok:
>> $ urpmf --sourcerpm :amarok | sort | grep lib
>> lib64amarokcore1:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>> lib64amaroklib1:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>> lib64amarokocsclient4:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>> lib64amarokpud1:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>> lib64amarok-sqlcollection1:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>> lib64amarok-transcoding1:amarok-2.4.1-0.mga1.src.rpm
>>
>> every lib is in a separate package, even though:
>> - Nothing else uses any of those libs other than Amarok
>> - Amarok is linked against all of those libs and it wouldn't work if
>> you uninstall any of them
>>
>> In such a case grouping all of them in one lib*amarok package would be
>> easier, there'll never be any file conflicts when the mojor of any of
>> them changes.
> 
> IMO we should have an exception so that libraries like these that are
> related to and required by a single program/package that are not
> expected (i.e. there are no header files) to be used by others, should
> be packaged in the main package itself.
> 
> I.e. I'd put all of those in amarok package itself, if there is zero
> advantage from splitting them.

Yeah, on reflection, I think this makes sense. IMO the lib policy is
generally very good and useful, particularly on 64 vs 32 bit systems,
but I cannot install both amarok in 32 and 64 bit flavours anyway, so
there is no advantage in this regard to splitting it's libs.

That said, it makes the lib policy that bit vaguer and harder to
understand... but it does also help keep orphaned files down.

Col


-- 

Colin Guthrie
mageia(at)colin.guthr.ie
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/]
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor [http://www.mageia.org/]
  PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/]
  Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/]