qboosh at pld-linux.org
Fri Dec 28 17:54:30 CET 2012
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 06:04:09PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> what's the opinion of using (for example) "BR:
> pkgconfig(gsettings-desktop-schemas)" instead of
> "BR gsettings-desktop-schemas-devel"
> i find it pretty convinient to fill deps this way, as mostly
> configure.ac requires those pkg-config names, not exact (rpm)packages
> as for example, a build requires -only- *icon-theme.pc, but the .pc
> could be in main package (gnome-icon-theme) or -devel package
> (mate-icon-theme-devel), filling pkgconfig dep gets exactly there what
> is wanted, not as filling package name into dep
> the pkgconfig deps are even versioned properly (code versions, not rpm
> versions), so can fill versioned dependencies without thinking which
> epoch is accurate.
But it's less convenient for developers, to map individual BRs to
"human"/RPM package names.
I'd use pkgconfig() BRs only in uncertain cases (when .pc file was moved
between packages, when .pc file was added to package at some unknown
moment, when .pc version doesn't match rpm version), beside package
Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.pl/
More information about the pld-devel-en