----- "Mark Goodwin" <goodwinos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/23/2010 12:06 PM, Nathan Scott wrote:
> >
> So that's a reasonably robust run-time check and I'd be surprised if
> rpm could auto-figure-out the dependency on sysstat.
Try it I guess, but rpm is pretty impressive at finding such things
in my experience.
> > I think we are going to have to end up with individual packages for
> > each importer.
> >
>
> seems like over-kill to me, but if that's how we need to go then I
> guess I'm ok with it. What kind of package name did you have in mind?
Well, its not really my preference but I think its the only way.
> Something like pcp-sar2pcp, which would depend on sysstat and
Yep, that would be good.
> perl-PCP-LogImport? Or maybe if sar2pcp was in a sub-package of
> perl-PCP-LogImport, it would rightfully be called something like
> perl-PCP-LogImport-sar2pcp, which is getting a bit verbose :)
>
Don't think we should put implementation details in the name, a
converter could get reimplemented in C or some other language in
a later incantation.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|