Mark Goodwin wrote:
> Nathan Scott wrote:
>>> So regarding PCP in distros ...
>>> Debian is up-to-date
>>> Suse needs a refresh
>>> Fedora and Rhel need to eat their veggies.
>> Now that Marks at Redhat, hopefully we'll see that situation
>> rectified sooner rather than later.
>
> yes an aim of mine will be to get PCP into Fedora and eventually
> into RHEL. It will certainly help at sites with perf issues,
> rather than relying on "good'ol sar", said as nicely as I can :-}
>
>> The main issue there is
>> the need to split the current pcp rpm into separate library
>> runtime, devel, and main pcp package.
>>
>
> I had a brief look at this last week. Nathan has already done
> the packaging split for Debian, see debian/*.{install,dirs}
> so it'd be a matter of hacking the RPM spec to create sub-packages
> in a similar fashion :
>
> # ls -1 debian/*.{install,dirs}
> debian/libpcp3-dev.dirs
> debian/libpcp3-dev.install
> debian/libpcp3.install
> debian/libpcp-gui1-dev.dirs
> debian/libpcp-gui1-dev.install
> debian/libpcp-gui1.install
> debian/libpcp-mmv1-dev.dirs
> debian/libpcp-mmv1-dev.install
> debian/libpcp-mmv1.install
> debian/libpcp-pmda3-dev.dirs
> debian/libpcp-pmda3-dev.install
> debian/libpcp-pmda3.install
> debian/libpcp-trace2-dev.dirs
> debian/libpcp-trace2-dev.install
> debian/libpcp-trace2.install
> (and then a catch-all for the base package)
so this is what... 10 packages, 5 of them -devel?
> But isn't that many packages a bit of an over-kill? I'm not sure of
> the actual packaging policies for Fedora, but surely it would be
> enough to have pcp, pcp-libs and pcp-devel (and similar for pcp-gui)
> rather than a separate package and devel package for every library ...
> or is *that* the policy?
I don't think Fedora would dictate that. Nathan, what is the reason for
such fine-grained splitout in debian? On fedora we might do it if one
bit of the libraries had onerous dependencies, or something...
> We'd also want to move those files into the build directory since
> they'd no longer be just for debian.
aren't those unique to the debian packaging procedures?
-Eric
> [cc: Eric since he's interested in this too]
>
> Cheers
> -- Mark
>
|