Description of problem:
The attached patch fixes the spec file for beagle so that it conforms with the
It adds the devel package for the pkgconfig and makes subpackages reliant on the
version and release of the main package. It also globs some of the files
included in the %files directory (makes it a tad more readable IMO)
Created attachment 135437 [details]
Beagle patch file
Adding a -devel package containing just a .pc file is just ridiculous.
Thems are the guidelines - I've been hauled up for it on the extras packages
(In reply to comment #2)
> Adding a -devel package containing just a .pc file is just ridiculous.
It's in the packaging guidelines, though. The reasoning is found here:
The start of the thread is here:
If you have an alternative or would like to explain why the reasoning is bogus
the packaging committee would be happy to hear it (the rule stinks but the
dependency chain pulling in -devel packages stinks worse.)
The rule may be overbroad as well. If you have examples of packages where the
reasoning doesn't apply we can modify the guidelines to account for those. If
you come up with language that expresses the restrictions and the exceptions
accurately, that's even better. The Packaging Committee has email discussions
on: fedora-packaging[AT]redhat.com and IRC meetings on #fedora-packaging.
I applied some of the changes in 0.2.9-2.
I don't like the globbing. That can to easily break in later versions when new
files get added.
Also, i didn't break out the -devel package, because that will cause multilib
conflicts. If we need to do this we need to fix the conflicts in the bin wrappers.
This seems an over and done with issue, if not then please reopen.