[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[Fedora-haskell-list] Re: Test package - Cabal-1.4.0.2 (using cabal_* macros). was: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Revised Haskell Guidelines 2008.08.13
- From: Jens Petersen <petersen redhat com>
- To: fedora krishnan cc
- Cc: fedora-haskell-list redhat com
- Subject: [Fedora-haskell-list] Re: Test package - Cabal-1.4.0.2 (using cabal_* macros). was: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Revised Haskell Guidelines 2008.08.13
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:03:36 +1000
Rajesh Krishnan さんは書きました:
For Hackage packages that contain only libraries, or a single executable, the
package building specification is clear (name the RPM for library only
package xyz as ghc-xyz, and name the RPM for a single executable package xyz
as just xyz without the ghc prefix).
The example corresponding to xmonad (which has both an executable and
library) is given in the guidelines: the base package name in that case
should be just "xmonad".
What would be the RPM name for a Hackage package xyz that contains multiple
libraries and multiple executables? Is it OK to create a single RPM called
xyz in for such a package, or do they necessarily need to be split up into
multiple package fragments? Please explain if you could. Note that the
number of such fragmented RPMs would multiply fast (creation of perhaps -prof
and -doc etc. if applicable for each subpackage) .
So do you have a specific package in mind? It is easier to discuss
concrete examples than hypothetical cases. :)
Jens
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]