alsa vs OSS in esound (Re: SPECS: esound.spec (HEAD))

[Radoslaw Zielinski]

Michal Moskal <malekith at pld-linux.org> [02-09-2003 20:13]:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2003 at 08:08:37PM +0200, malekith wrote:
>> Module name:	SPECS
>> Changes by:	malekith	03/09/02 20:08:35

>> Modified files:
>> 	esound.spec

>> Log message:
>> - fix --without alsa descripting -- enabling alsa disables OSS
> You can enable either alsa or OSS in esd. I personally use OSS, some
> people use alsa, so there is no good default for distribution. A
> solution would be to provide esound-alsa and esound-oss mutually
> exclusive packages, but only way to do it, I see, is to make
> libesd.so.x.y a symlink (made in %post) to proper library which is ugly
> hack I think. Does anybody have better solution?

Make two distinct packages Conflict:'ing each other, give them Provides:
esound(thistimereally), and add this to Requires in the (almost empty)
esound package.  And turn off resolving libfoo.so.x.y -> `rpm -q --qf
'%{NAME}\n' --whatprovides libfoo.so.x.y` at the building stage, for
there will only be one esound-(alsa|oss) installed on a builder.

-- 
Radosław Zieliński <radek at karnet.pl>
[ GPG key: http://radek.karnet.pl/ ]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-en/attachments/20040626/1331f12c/attachment-0002.bin