[Fedora-packaging] PHP packaging policy notes

Tim Jackson lists at timj.co.uk
Tue Jul 4 22:21:19 UTC 2006


Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>>> "CS" == Christopher Stone <chris.stone at 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:.

Tim




More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list