On 18 July 2011 22:37, Luc Menut wrote:
> Le 13/07/2011 12:41, Ahmad Samir a écrit :
>>
>> On 13 July 2011 12:34, nicolas vigier wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>>>
> ...
Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
now, whenever we t
Le 13/07/2011 12:41, Ahmad Samir a écrit :
On 13 July 2011 12:34, nicolas vigier wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
...
Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
now, whenever we touch a spec we change to the pkgconfig provides, and
gradually all the
On 13 July 2011 12:34, nicolas vigier wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>
>> On 10 July 2011 10:03, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>> > On 8 July 2011 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>> >> Hello.
>> >>
>> >> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
>> >> in the distro,
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> On 10 July 2011 10:03, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> > On 8 July 2011 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> >> Hello.
> >>
> >> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> >> in the distro, there should be:
> >> Provides: %{name}-devel
> >> Prov
On 13 July 2011 12:15, Christiaan Welvaart wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>
>>> https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2065
>>
>> Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
>> now, whenever we touch a spec we change to the pkgconfig provides, and
>> gr
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2065
Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
now, whenever we touch a spec we change to the pkgconfig provides, and
gradually all the specs will be adapted.
And for the packages that
13.07.2011 13:02, Ahmad Samir kirjutas:
Using pkgconfig provides looks like an optimal option, we could start
now, whenever we touch a spec we change to the pkgconfig provides, and
gradually all the specs will be adapted.
And for the packages that don't have .pc files we add:
Provides: %{name}-
On 10 July 2011 10:03, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> On 8 July 2011 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
>> in the distro, there should be:
>> Provides: %{name}-devel
>> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>>
>> either both of them in _all_
On 8 July 2011 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> in the distro, there should be:
> Provides: %{name}-devel
> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>
> either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
> packages, so tha
On 8 July 2011 17:31, nicolas vigier wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>>
>> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
>> in the distro, there should be:
>> Provides: %{name}-devel
>> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>
> Good idea.
>
> With version
Le vendredi 08 juillet 2011 à 17:27 +0300, Anssi Hannula a écrit :
> On 08.07.2011 07:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> > in the distro, there should be:
> > Provides: %{name}-devel
> > Provides: lib%{name}-devel
> >
Am 08.07.2011 17:31, schrieb nicolas vigier:
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
Hello.
I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
in the distro, there should be:
Provides: %{name}-devel
Provides: lib%{name}-devel
Good idea.
With version and release included :
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> in the distro, there should be:
> Provides: %{name}-devel
> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
Good idea.
With version and release included :
Provides: %{name}-devel = %{version
On 08.07.2011 07:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> in the distro, there should be:
> Provides: %{name}-devel
> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>
> either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
> packages, so tha
On 8 July 2011 13:44, EatDirt wrote:
> On 08/07/11 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
>>
>> Hello.
>>
>> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
>> in the distro, there should be:
>> Provides: %{name}-devel
>> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>>
>> either both of them in _all_ packa
On 08/07/11 06:37, Ahmad Samir wrote:
Hello.
I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
in the distro, there should be:
Provides: %{name}-devel
Provides: lib%{name}-devel
either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
packages, so that we don't have to
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Ahmad Samir wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
> in the distro, there should be:
> Provides: %{name}-devel
> Provides: lib%{name}-devel
>
> either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
> packag
Hello.
I've had a rather vague idea about standardising the virtual provides
in the distro, there should be:
Provides: %{name}-devel
Provides: lib%{name}-devel
either both of them in _all_ packages, or one of them in _all_
packages, so that we don't have to check urpmq --provides all the
time. Pe
18 matches
Mail list logo
