[Fedora-packaging] [Fwd: devel packages with only one .pc file]

[Christopher Stone]

On 9/4/06, Matthias Saou
<thias at spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>
wrote:
> Rex Dieter wrote :
>
> > Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > Forwarding this here too.
> > >
> > > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > > From: Alexander Larsson <alexl at redhat.com>
> > > Reply-To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers
> > > <fedora-maintainers at redhat.com>
> > > To: List for Fedora Package Maintainers <fedora-maintainers at redhat.com>
> > > Subject: devel packages with only one .pc file
> > > Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 15:11:26 +0200
> > >
> > > I've recently got several bugs against package involving basically
> > > splitting out only one pkg-config file into a -devel package, because
> > > the packaging guidelines says so. I've done this for a couple of
> > > packages, but its starting to get very ridicolous.
> > >
> > > The one-file -devel package is totally useless
> >
> > I would tend to agree, a single .pc file -devel pkg is a bit silly.
> > Perhaps the existing rule:
> >
> > - MUST: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package.
> >
> > probably ought to be amended.
>
> Well, if the .pc file has its cflags or libs show that the package
> requires other libraries (some X libs, or gtk stuff, or...), then it
> does make sense to split the -devel package out, since it will not just
> contain one file, but also other -devel package requirements that we
> definitely don't want to be forcing on all simple users of the runtime
> bits.
>

+1

This has been discussed before and it was decided that a .pc file
should be in a devel package even if it is the only file in the
package for the reason given by Matthias.

And I don't see it being worth the effort to try and come up with
exceptions to the rule.  There is barely any overhead involved in
creating a single file devel package (AFAIK).