n3npq at me.com
Fri Dec 28 18:15:51 CET 2012
On Dec 28, 2012, at 11:04 AM, 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.
If you want a reliable mapping, then there needs to be
a well-defined semantic based on some reliable mechanism defined
for the pkgconfig(…) dependency name space.
You have already mentioned 2 mappings, one based on RPMTAG_PROVIDENAME,
the other based on RPMTAG_FILEPATHS (there are several tags here).
There are additional issues with multiple mappings: the mapping is not 1-to-1.
A mapping is quite doable if the semantic is well-defined.
73 de Jeff
More information about the pld-devel-en