Re: Red Hat RPM packaging policy?

["Michael A. Peters" <mpeters mac com>]

On Tue, 2003-04-08 at 12:44, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Just curious - does Red Hat have a packaging policy, describing how
> packages should be named, split into foo/libfoo/libfoo-devel, etc?

I'm don't work for Red Hat - but I've noticed that almost always, perl
modules are named perl-Module - and yes, RH (and numerous others) split
the headers and static libs off into a -devel package. Something I
personally hate (if anyone wants to know why I'll say so- but that would
be off topic).

When I write rpm's - I try to cover all grounds.
I don't spit off the headers and static libs, but I'll put a Provides:
%{name}-devel into it so that other rpm's that require the devel package
won't freak.

If it's a library only package but the tarball name is whatever instead
of libwhatever - I call the rpm whatever (keep consistant with the
tarball name) but put Provides libwhatever; whatever-devel, and
libwhatever-devel.

-=-
Since RPM was accepted by that linux standards group - perhaps they have
a specification on packaging policy naming scheme? (I don't know - but
I'd be curious to find out)


-- 
Michael A. Peters <mpeters@mac.com>