[Fedora-packaging] Open issues with the PHP guidelines

Tim Jackson lists at timj.co.uk
Fri Jun 30 10:40:42 UTC 2006

Christopher Stone wrote:

> I have put up what I think is a good template for pear modules here:
> http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/spectemplate-pear.spec

Great, thanks for the work on this. You seem to have simplified/improved 
some aspects of what I'd come up with so far as a "best" spec as used in 
  a slightly less generic form in:


I haven't had a chance to try it yet but will do so with 
PEAR_Command_Packaging soon. Immediate (minor) points from a visual scan:

a) Requires: php - is this necessary? Surely a dep on php-pear(PEAR) is 
sufficient, since that will itself pull PHP in?

b) Provides: php-Foo-Bar - what's the reasoning behind this?

c) You've removed all the pearrc cruft - if this really works (which it 
looks like it should) then GREAT! I inherited that from previous work by 
other people and have never really thought about it but logically since 
we have a BR of php-pear, then the PEAR defaults should be appropriate 
for our distro and there's no need to construct a temporary pearrc.

d) I think "%{__cp} -p package.xml" should be replaced with 
"%{__install} -m 644 ...", just as a good practice thing


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list