On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:

On 2008-07-09 11:11:05 -0500, Archie Cobbs wrote:

...

I noticed that if an OBS package has an _aggregate file AND a normal spec file, then the spec file is ignored.

Any reason why you can't do a normal build and an _aggregate link together at the same time in the same package?

This would seem like a logical thing to do when your goal is simply to aggregate the "normal" RPM's requirements into your project, so your repository is transitively closed.

first of all aggregates should be avoided if possible. 2nd you create a 2nd package and put the aggregate file in there.

Sorry, I guess my question was not very well stated. The question is: why not change OBS to allow a package to have a spec file and _aggregate at the same time? Thanks, -Archie -- Archie L. Cobbs --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Dirk Stöcker wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008, Archie Cobbs wrote:

...

The question is: why not change OBS to allow a package to have a spec file and _aggregate at the same time?

Because it violates the design of packages and brings no benefit?

I'm not sure I understand what "design of packages" means.. is this what you mean: "each package in OBS should build (or link, or aggregate) exactly one RPM (plus sub-packages)" ? If so, then why is there an <aggregatelist> tag which accepts multiple <aggregate> tags? In any case, (here repeating myself) it would be nice if someone would document on the wiki "best practices" or "OBS design principles" or something like that. I would do it myself but I haven't yet figured them out (hence my annoying questions :-) Regarding the benefit of doing supporting spec + _aggregate, here's the benefit I see: 1. You are building RPM A. 2. RPM A BuildRequires: B, C, D and Requires: B, C, D. 3. No other package in your project requires B, C, or D. 4. You have decided (for whatever reason (separate discussion*)) to aggregate B, C, and D In this situation, it seems more logical to aggregate B, C, and D all at once, using an _aggregate file in package A (therefore better encapuslating the dependencies), rather than creating three new packages B, C, and D each with their own _aggregate file. Thanks, -Archie * I would also like to have this discussion of _aggregate vs. linking repositories.. see previous forwarded email: http://lists.opensuse.org/archive/opensuse-buildservice/2008-07/msg00055.htm... -- Archie L. Cobbs --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Juergen Weigert wrote:

On Jul 10, 08 10:53:08 -0500, Archie Cobbs wrote:

...

Regarding the benefit of doing supporting spec + _aggregate, here's the benefit I see:

1. You are building RPM A. 2. RPM A BuildRequires: B, C, D and Requires: B, C, D. 3. No other package in your project requires B, C, or D. 4. You have decided (for whatever reason (separate discussion*)) to aggregate B, C, and D

In this situation, it seems more logical to aggregate B, C, and D all at once, using an _aggregate file in package A (therefore better encapuslating the dependencies), rather than creating three new packages B, C, and D each with their own _aggregate file.

I believe the best practice for this is a subproject, in which you have A, B, C, D as seperate packages. This also gives you the desired encapuslation.

Thanks, that makes sense. -Archie -- Archie L. Cobbs --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org