pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: rpm dependencies

To: Max Matveev <makc@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: rpm dependencies
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 16:41:14 -0500 (EST)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <21115.57413.974649.418399@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <21115.57413.974649.418399@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: 0LBy9GvTinT8ktB3EaKJ0MAVDrZarA==
Thread-topic: rpm dependencies
Hi Max!

----- Original Message -----
> 
> Mark and/or Nathan,
> 
> What's the idea with rpm dependencies on RHEL5?
> 

The idea is to allow development using pcp libraries, headers,
and perly/snakey bits without having to install pcp itself (and
hence have to worry about starting daemons and so on).

> 
> I can understand libmicrohttpd could be legitimate dependency
> (although I'd argue that if one doesn't give a damn about http access
> one should need it) but why create dependency on python-pcp and

There's the option of not building it in still for people who
feel that way, or not worrying about it (it can be chkconfig'd
off like anything else).

> perl-PCP-PMDA? I mean you've split them into separate rpm to avoid
> dragging perly and snaky bits into an installation which doesn't
> need/doesn't care about those bits and yet you have a dependency on
> them? What gives?

So far its been laid out more to help with development than to
reduce the installed set for actual deployments.  That could
change, of course, but that's the reasoning for things as they
stand today.

cheers.

--
Nathan

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