On Dec 28, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: > hi > > what's the opinion of using (for example) "BR: > pkgconfig(gsettings-desktop-schemas)" instead of > "BR gsettings-desktop-schemas-devel" > > i find it pretty convinient to fill deps this way, as mostly configure.ac > requires those pkg-config names, not exact (rpm)packages > > as for example, a build requires -only- *icon-theme.pc, but the .pc could be > in main package (gnome-icon-theme) or -devel package (mate-icon-theme-devel), > filling pkgconfig dep gets exactly there what is wanted, not as filling > package name into dep > > the pkgconfig deps are even versioned properly (code versions, not rpm > versions), so can fill versioned dependencies without thinking which epoch is > accurate. >
If you want a reliable mapping, then there needs to be a well-defined semantic based on some reliable mechanism defined for the pkgconfig(…) dependency name space. You have already mentioned 2 mappings, one based on RPMTAG_PROVIDENAME, the other based on RPMTAG_FILEPATHS (there are several tags here). There are additional issues with multiple mappings: the mapping is not 1-to-1. A mapping is quite doable if the semantic is well-defined. 73 de Jeff _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
