Hello, On Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le mardi 11 octobre 2011, à 14:02 +0200, David Haller a écrit :
can any maintainers of devel:libraries:c_c++/quvi have a look over my updated quvi package (esp. the .spec and -rpmlintrc), as upstream has split up the package ... I'm quite unsure if packaging it like that is ok (-> see rpmlintrc).
Unless there's a really good reason, I'd say it's better to do one source package per tarball: this means creating libquvi-scripts and libquvi source packages.
I'm undecided ;) I guess upstream split the package (probably mainly -scripts from the rest) so -scripts can be independently updated from the rest. -scripts contains all the website specific scripts and stuff and is much more volatile the libquvi, I think. I guess I'd want to keep quvi and libquvi in one src package though. I think one could wait for the next upstream updates, look what changes there (only -scripts or quvi/libquvi as well?).
The rpmlintrc is just for libquvi-scripts, I guess.
Correct, all 3 filters are for libquvi-scripts.
It's mostly okay, except this: addFilter("devel-file-in-non-devel-package.*/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libquvi-scripts.pc")
I'd move this .pc file to a libquvi-scripts-devel subpackage.
A -devel package for just one single 236 Byte file? Seems overkill to me. But I'm glad that you think that 'libquvi-scripts' is the right name for the package and that it's therefore ok to ignore the lib-packaging policy/rpmlint-checks. -dnh --
All cats purr at 28hz. I think your cats need tuning - according to a couple of quick measurements on a recently calibrated reference cat, the dominant frequency of a correctly adjusted cat should be 12Hz +/-20%. -- Lionel Lauer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org