On Friday 2013-05-17 19:35, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

Shawn,

The policy indicates that the library soname be used as package name... so the lib forces the name of the package, not the other way around.

example: libpanel-applet-1.so.0 would result in libpanel-applet-1.0 (which is

...would have to result in "-1-0" not "-1.0". To get to the "libpanel-applet-1.0" package name, one would need a libpanel-applet-1.0.so (without trailing SO versions). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

On Friday 2013-05-17 20:03, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

Jan,

Thanks for pointing out the typo.. let me return the favor:

libpanel-applet-1.0.so would result in libpanel-applet-1_0 => you know very well that a '.' is not valid in our package names :)

For a moment, I was led astray by Debian there! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, 21 May 2013, Sascha Peilicke wrote:

On 05/17/2013 08:03 PM, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

...

Jan,

Thanks for pointing out the typo.. let me return the favor:

libpanel-applet-1.0.so would result in libpanel-applet-1_0 => you know very well that a '.' is not valid in our package names :)

Huh? I don't think this statement is current any more, in general we allow dots in package names for a while now. As far as I remember, the only technical limitation was that the old autobuild system broke on such package names. However, RPM and OBS are totally fine with these. And we have plenty of examples in Factory by the way:

% osc -A obs ls openSUSE:Factory | grep "\." | wc -l 21

Still that was the very reason for this substitution and I don't think we should change that now. Note that the rpmlint error specifies the package name that should have been used at the end of the error. Richard. -- Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de> SUSE / SUSE Labs SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nuernberg - AG Nuernberg - HRB 16746 GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, On Tue, 21 May 2013, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

% osc -A obs ls openSUSE:Factory | grep "\." | wc -l 21

Wow that looks ugly. Really, I would have preferred python3-zope-interface rather than python3-zope.interface,

Yikes! Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

On 05/21/2013 06:05 PM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

On Tuesday 2013-05-21 18:01, Michael Matz wrote:

...

Hi,

On Tue, 21 May 2013, Jan Engelhardt wrote:

...

...

% osc -A obs ls openSUSE:Factory | grep "\." | wc -l 21

Wow that looks ugly. Really, I would have preferred python3-zope-interface rather than python3-zope.interface,

Yikes!

What? For Perl, we also have perl-Class-Package, and so on.

Perl is different (tm)! It uses the colons which RPM _really_ can't use (@mls, why actually?). In general, package names should follow their upstream project names as much as possible and not how we prefer it to look like. If an upstream name contains dots, so be it. The rest is mood.

If any in-program identifiers need to be specified, there is perl(Class::Package), or for python there could be some python(zope.interface), or java(java.io).

Feel free to implement, 90% of a solution can be found in home:saschpe:pyrpm. It didn't yet found it's way into the python base package due to lack of time, unfortunately. -- Sascha Peilicke SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org