[Fedora-packaging] Ocaml sub-package issue

Panu Matilainen pmatilai at laiskiainen.org
Thu Oct 8 08:42:08 UTC 2009

On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 04:07:45PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> Just a question about this: If we need to pass extra options to the
>> dependency scripts (as in the example specfile below), can we still do
>> that?
>> http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/ocaml-pxp/ocaml-pxp.spec?revision=1.11&view=markup
> I should probably add that the need to use the '-i' option is really a
> hack to workaround a bug in the script.
> The problem is that if an OCaml library has submodules, like:
>  Module
>  Module.Submodule1
>  Module.Submodule2
> then ocaml-find-requires will export Requires digests for Module,
> Submodule1 and Submodule2.  (It should only export them for Module).
> ocaml-find-provides will only make digests for Module, so you get
> broken dependencies.
> Adding -i Submodule1 -i Submodule2 in this case is a hack to say
> "those are submodules, don't export them".
> I tried a long time ago to resolve this with upstream but didn't get
> anywhere as it seems like a subtle problem with the implementation of
> modules-vs-submodules which I don't fully understand.

Sure it's a workaround, but look at the hoops perl packagers are jumping 
through because of defiences in perl.[req|prov]...

Anyway, upstream rpm now permits passing arbitrary options to the dep 
extractor scripts by simply defining language and dependency-specific 
_opts macros, eg

%define __ocaml_requires_opts -i Submodule1
%define __perl_provides_opts -e notimplemented

Whatever the scripts do or dont do with the options is up to them.

 	- Panu -

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list