[Fedora-packaging] Packaging clarification regarding bash-completion scripts

Michel Salim michel.sylvan at gmail.com
Wed Feb 25 00:12:22 UTC 2009

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Florian Festi <ffesti at redhat.com> wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> For those cases, 2 approaches exist:
>> 1) let all packages which provide such a plugin own the directory, they
>> install a plugin/add-on to (This is the approach, which is being applied for
>> packaging perl-modules)
>> This approach, however is only functional when all packages providing such
>> "plugins/add-ons" obey such a convention.
>> 2) split out the plugin/add-on package into a separate package and let
>> this spit-out package depend on the "base-package".
> There is a third possible approach:
> Split out the plugin dir into a separate package and let
> plugin/add-on packages depend on it.
That is actually a very good idea. That way, you can even script the
following query: "which functionality do I have plugins for?" by doing

rpm -qa \*-filesystem

or whichever common naming convention we settle on.


miʃel salim  •  http://hircus.jaiku.com/
IUCS         •  msalim at cs.indiana.edu
Fedora       •  salimma at fedoraproject.org
MacPorts     •  hircus at macports.org

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list