naming packages installed to /usr/share/pear

Arkadiusz Miskiewicz arekm at
Tue Oct 19 14:03:35 CEST 2010

On Friday 01 of October 2010, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:

> currently pear make-rpm-spec decides (and seems work farily well):
> - if package cames from pear channel, name it php-pear-%{pkgname}
> - if cames elsewhere, name it as php-%{pkgname}
> - if it is source package, it will be named as php-pecl-%{pkgname}
> does anybody see problem with this pattern?

Looks fine to me.

> should the pear-channel packages renamed also to php-%{pkgname}

IMO php-pear is better (so at least I know that it is from

> and what to do with ezcomponents.spec,
> drop it and build each package from separate spec?

No idea. Choose some way.

> similar package is php-seclib.spec, which initially packages whole
> channel, should each of them be created own .spec?
> if ezcomponents.spec and php-seclib.spec aren't split to package specs,
> should it P: names if they would?

Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz        PLD/Linux Team
arekm /  

More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list