Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (205 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: devel subpackages in baselibs.conf (was Re: [opensuse-packaging] Specfile Guidelines sweep over Factory)
On Montag 19 September 2011 15:50:29 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2011-09-19 14:58, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi Jan,
One other change I'm seeing in some sr is the addition of devel
subpackages to baselibs.conf. I don't think it's needed in most
cases. Or is there some rationale for it?
Yeah, I was wondering about that as well.

Often enough I have found myself in a position where I would like to
test $PROGRAM in a non-default compilation mode, and that requires
that all libraries also exist.

(Point in case, I was asked to try prboom-plus in 32-bit mode, which
required adding -devel to baselibs for at least the entire SDL stack.
And some developers prefer a quick local compile rather than having to
upload a new tarball into OBS and wait for the result -- also the
latter has licensing constraints.)

I am therefore of the opinion that -devel in [certain] baselibs that I
am interested in is alright.
Wouldn't it be better to setup a 32bit chroot enviroment (or osc build)
for such a usecase? It just seems wrong to ship lots of libraries and
headers as -32bit packages for that purpose. IIRC the baselibs mechanism
was introduced to just provide some core libraries to be able to run
binaries which either don't build or are otherwise not available for the
native (64bit) platform.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >