FS#44050 - [pacman] No way of specifying different make dependencies for split packages
Attached to Project:
Pacman
Opened by João Guerra (joca.bt) - Wednesday, 04 March 2015, 22:10 GMT
Last edited by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) - Wednesday, 11 March 2015, 20:19 GMT
Opened by João Guerra (joca.bt) - Wednesday, 04 March 2015, 22:10 GMT
Last edited by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) - Wednesday, 11 March 2015, 20:19 GMT
|
Details
Currently, there is no way for subpackages within a split
package to have different make dependencies
(https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PKGBUILD#pkgbase).
Why is this an issue? Consider a package containing some software developed in Python (which is awfully common). Usually, such packages have 2 branches: one for Python 2 and another for Python 3. pkgbase="python-package" pkgname=("python2-package" "python3-package") Moreover, these packages may need to be conflicting, as their binaries/libs may need to have a specific filename due to other software that uses them, for example. In these cases, other split packages depending on such packages cannot be built, as (i) the make dependencies are not specific to each subpackage and (ii) the package on which they make depend are conflicting. makedepends=("python2-package" "python3-pygments") What is currently done for packages like this is that the conflicting files in one of the branches are renamed. This breaks other dependencies and may force the user to rename the conflicting files to work-around the issue for other depending packages. Furthermore, in most cases, the user will not install both branches, as he is only interested in the one for the Python version he uses, for example. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory)
Wednesday, 11 March 2015, 20:19 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Wednesday, 11 March 2015, 20:19 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Comment by
Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) -
Wednesday, 04 March 2015, 23:34 GMT
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) -
Wednesday, 04 March 2015, 23:49 GMT
Comment by
Andrew Gregory (andrewgregory) -
Thursday, 05 March 2015, 00:09 GMT
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) -
Thursday, 05 March 2015, 03:02 GMT
Split PKGBUILDs are intended for multiple packages created from
the same build. If they require different make dependencies they
should use separate PKGBUILDs.
Andrew, are you saying that python2 and python3 packages should be
separate? :)
If both packages can't be made from the same build, yes.
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/38160
Oh, I agree. I've had this discussion before and you're the first
dev that's agreed with me. I'll have to point falconindy to this
report.