[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] pcp packaging split

To: Max Matveev <makc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] pcp packaging split
From: Nathan Scott <nscott@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 09:38:05 +1000 (EST)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx, Mark Goodwin <goodwinos@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <18962.46349.841073.192575@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
----- "Max Matveev" <makc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >>>>> "MG" == Mark Goodwin writes:
>  MG> yes that's correct. Looks like Fedora would only require that we
>  MG> split pcp into pcp and pcp-devel (with pcp-debuginfo as a
> by-product).
> Having pcp-libs will help with those pecky pcp killers installed in
> the chroot jails: pcp-libs can be base for both pcp and pcp-devel,
> for
> development you don't need to install the the whole package.

Yes!  And we can remove the /etc/init.d/pcp script hack to try to
work around that, then (the bit that figures out the path to the
running pmcd's logfile).

> BTW, Nathan, should newhelp be in a devel package?

Probably not, I guess, for the same reasons that build{defs,rules}
shouldnt be there either (needed by the runtime environment for
installing some PMDAs).



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>