One source, multiple packages?

[King InuYasha]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com> wrote:

> David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead.org> writes:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-10 at 12:12 +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> >> personally I would compile twice, once enabling mysql and another time
> >> pgsql, and create 2 packages. each package would install a
> >> "motion-dbname" binary, and a symlink would allow access via the well
> >> known name "motion". Using alternatives would allow a switch between the
> >> two.
>
> > The better option would be to make the program use loadable plugins for
> > database support.
>
> Well, yeah, but that's a bit above and beyond what a packager should do.
> If he's also an upstream developer, then he should undertake that
> addition with his developer hat on; but it's *well* beyond the size of
> patch that a Fedora package should be carrying.
>
> In the meantime, separate subpackages sounds like the right plan to me.
> One big package would be a bad idea because of all the dependencies
> it'd drag in.
>
>                        regards, tom lane
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>

Why can't RPM packages have a Requires saying "mysql OR postgresql" or
something like that? That would be useful for web packages, especially ones
like phpBB, Enano, MediaWiki, and others...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090213/956e2feb/attachment.htm>