[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] PHP packaging policy notes

Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"CS" == Christopher Stone <chris stone gmail com> writes:

CS> I have some php-pear packages which specifically indicate they
CS> need php >= 4.2.0 some that say they need php >= 4.3.0.  If these
CS> versions are specified by the package, they should be indicated in
CS> the spec file (IMO).

I'm not sure I agree; Perl and Python modules will require the version
of Perl or Python that was installed when the package was built (via
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_blah) or python-abi); it is certainly simpler to figure it out automatically instead of leaving it to the packager to
try and specify something which may be essentially meaningless.  But
on the other hand, of core updates the PHP package, we don't want
modules automatically forcing a core PHP package update.  So I guess
I'm undecided.

If it's any help, the authors of many PEAR/PECL packages specify explicit versions via the package.xml file included with the tarball. In this case I think we should just go with what upstream specify as they're by far the best placed to judge.

NB that at least for specs generated via PEAR_Command_Packaging, this stuff will happen automatically; the specified version (if any) in package.xml will be translated into an RPM Requires:.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]