Le 18/05/2015 00:12, Johannes Löthberg a écrit :
On 17/05, Bruno Pagani wrote:
Indeed. It’s exfalso without quodlibet (I only use the former, and a lot of other people too), another way to do this would be splitting the repo package into four (or more, if splitting l10n):
– /quodlibet/ – /exfalso/ – /quodlibet-libs/, on which one the previous two should depends – /quodlibet-l10n/ with /usr/share/locale files (and, as said above, eventually split that one for each locale)
Should I open a bug against quodlibet packaging on Arch?
You could, but I doubt it would be done. It's not really the arch way to split packages.
As a matter of fact, such a request (split exfalso from quodlibet) was already made before (https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/32338), and was rejected because exfalso has to depends on most of the libs from quodlibet. However, the two packages don’t have the same dependencies, and that’s why a split package make sense to me. Should I reopen the the issue or continue with my AUR package?