Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (808 mails)

< Previous Next >
[opensuse-factory] Shared / static library packaging policy
  • From: Sascha Peilicke <saschpe@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 11:46:37 +0200
  • Message-id: <1605750.rkfLJgQmKQ@bort>
Hi guys,

your friendly (Factory) reviewing team would like to see more packages honor
our not-so-new shared / static library policy [1],[2]. It has been around for
ages, but we still have quite a bunch of offending packages in Factory. First
of all this is only a gentle reminder, but we would like to enforce the policy
for new packages more than we did so far. We believe that this is a wanted and
very necessary step in order to increase the quality of our packages.

The topic has already been cooking for a while and most packagers already do
an awesome job on that front and we want to encourage everyone to fix the
remaining bits. This means we don't like to see (and probably won't accept)
the following rpmlint filters in Factory submissions anymore:

- shlib-policy-missing-suffix
- shlib-policy-name-error
- shlib-policy-missing-lib
- shlib-fixed-dependency
- shlib-policy-nonversioned-dir
- shlib-legacy-policy-name-error
- shlib-policy-excessive-dependency

So, if your package has one of those, please read the docs on how to fix it
(or ask the list). Some good random examples on how it can be done (there are
plenty of others):

- openSUSE:Factory / gtkmm2
- openSUSE:Factory / librelp

Of course, there are always exceptions, thus this isn't set in stone. If a
package has to deviate from the policy, make sure to document why (if in
doubt, ask the list). A suitable place is the rpmlintrc file in your package
(it's Python, thus #commenting works).

Remember, the more text you throw at the reviewers in your spec / changes /
rpmlintrc files, the more likely it is that they understand the cause (but the
easier it may be for them to fend it off :-). Happy packaging!

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Sascha Peilicke
< Previous Next >
This Thread
  • No further messages