On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 02:09:09 +0000 (UTC) notify@aur.archlinux.org wrote:

Toost_Inc [1] filed a request to merge libtiff4 [2] into libtiff3 [3]:

Both packages essentially provide the same libraries, with one depending on another but using another symlink (`libtiff.so.4` instead of `libtiff.so.3`), which could be easily added to the other package.

It's quite a mess, creates weird dependency circles and has conflicting files to to top it off.

I've created a patch [*], that will solve this problem, which I've also posted in the comments of the libtiff3 package.

[*] https://gist.github.com/ToostInc/e94039b0d077d8251965

[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Toost_Inc/ [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/libtiff4/ [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/pkgbase/libtiff3/

I think they're fine separate, but I would do it the other way around. Make libtiff3 the main package (since that's the upstream soname), then make a separate libtiff4 package that just has the symlinks and nothing else. There's a lot of other simplification I would do, as well, but it should work as-is. Doug

On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:20:57 +0200 "Sam S." wrote:

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Doug Newgard wrote:

...

Make libtiff3 the main package (since that's the upstream soname), then make a separate libtiff4 package that just has the symlinks and nothing else. There's a lot of other simplification I would do, as well, but it should work as-is.

I'll await the outcome of this merge request; if they stay separate I'll probably go ahead and do that. Also, can you elaborate on those other simplifications? (Maybe on the package comment page rather than here.)

Sure, I'll post there. Another thing you could consider is making them a split PKGBUILD. Both packages would be built with a single PKGBUILD. This might satisfy Toost_Inc, and would reduce maintenance for you, even though these probably don't require much maintenance. Doug

On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 22:06:06 +0200 "Sam S." wrote:

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Doug Newgard wrote:

...

Another thing you could consider is making them a split PKGBUILD. Both packages would be built with a single PKGBUILD.

Could downstream packages specify either libtiff3 or libtiff34 in their 'depends', or would they have to specify the pkgbase of the split package? I'd like to avoid the latter.

Each package is treated separately, so packages could depend on libtiff3 or libtiff4 just the same as if they were separate PKGBUILDs.

Yeah, looks like I can't push the split package as long as libtiff4 exists separately: remote: error: cannot overwrite package: libtiff4 remote: error: hook declined to update refs/heads/master To ssh://aur@aur4.archlinux.org/libtiff3.git ! [remote rejected] master -> master (hook declined) Someone please accept this merge request then... :)

Request #3918 has been accepted by Kyrias [1]. [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/account/Kyrias/