devel packages with only one .pc file

[Alexander Larsson]

On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 10:01 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> 
> I think #1 is the best for clarity.  But I would also be willing to see
> the rule revised to something like #3 or #4 because I don't think most
> mono packages are going to have -devel files other than the pkgconfig
> file  (alexl, please correct me if you see this differently.)  Compared
> against each other, I think #3's major drawback is psychological: mono
> packagers may be hesitant to create -devel subpackages because the
> change will cascade to other packages, causing more work.  #4's main
> drawback is its direct conflict with the guidelines for C pkgconfig
> files.

I'm ok with rule #1 in most cases, the other ones just seem kludgy. And
i actually agree with the risk that other "devel" style files might be
added to the package.

However, there is one exception that i still would like to have, and
that is the case of development packages. I like to avoid
mono-nunit-devel and gtk-sharp2-gapi-devel, because i think they are
actually harmful. Developers will not expect that you get a full working
gapi enought to satisfy the buildrequirements of a module if you install
the gtk-sharp2-gapi, but configure will fail to find it because you
didn't install gtk-sharp2-gapi-devel. So, I'd like to see the rule be:

Any .pc files must be in a -devel subpackage, unless the package itself
is a development tool not installed in a user runtime. If the package
has a -devel subpackage for other reasons the place for the pc file is
up to the package owner (as it generaly depends on the usecase for the
pc file).

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
                   alexl at redhat.com    alla at lysator.liu.se 
He's a suave misogynist vagrant with a mysterious suitcase handcuffed to his 
arm. She's a brilliant hypochondriac doctor who don't take no shit from 
nobody. They fight crime!