[pacman-dev] My first splitted package
Marc - A. Dahlhaus
mad at wol.de
Sun Jan 18 05:41:12 EST 2009
Dan McGee schrieb:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre at archlinux.de> wrote:
>> Am Samstag 17 Januar 2009 13:26:09 schrieb Allan McRae:
>>> That PKGBUILD looks good to me. The only comment I have is that if
>>> someone does a "pacman -S phonon" they are going to get
>>> phonon-backend-gstreamer installed by default as this will be the first
>>> detected provider of phonon-backend. So people are going to want to do
>>> "pacman -S phonon-backend-foo" which will work because of the dependency
>>> cycle in there.
>>> I really do not know how to handle this better. Maybe a post install
>>> message for phonon saying a backend is needed. I am sure there is
>>> another package like that in one of the repos but cannot remember what
>>> it is...
>> It is similar to the libgl stuff. If you install anything that depends on it
>> pacman will grab fglrx or whatever comes first. So until pacman get some
>> implementation to ask the user to choose from different providers, we'll have
>> to live with that. But that are rare cases and not related to splitted
>> The next one I'll try is php. It should be more complex but there won't be
>> strange dependencies between sub packages.
> Thanks a bunch for trying this out, Pierre. It should get it closer to
> release knowing someone is putting it through the paces with real
> pacman-dev mailing list
> pacman-dev at archlinux.org
we use Allan's split-package implementation quite a while without any
We did rebuilds of all 291 PKGBUILDs we have in our pool of packages and
we have encountered no problems.
We also test split packages and are in progress to split all packages
for hardening into separate packages for binary
and development contents (headers and static libs). I attached our
PKGBUILD for bacula for reference.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
More information about the pacman-dev