[SFLphone] SFLphone on openSUSE Build Service

[René Krell]

On Thursday 27 August 2009 15:38:47 Pierre-Luc Bacon wrote:
> > One more note: I made one big rpm spec file for all - sfl-common,
> > sfl-client- kde and sfl-client-gnome and renamed them:
> > - sflphone (main package)
> > - sflphone-kde (subpackage)
> > - sflphone-gnome (subpackage)
> 
> Looks good. However, we need to make sure that the user is able to see
> that SFLPhone actually means sflphoned ... the deamon, and should not
> expect to get a GUI client with it. I'm all for the
> sflphone-gnome/sflphone-kde thing, but I think that "sflphone" might be
> confusing and something like "sflphone-server" is a little more
> precise.
> 

There is a wrinkle with rpm if you use a main package with subpackages. The 
whole package is not "sflphone-common" or "sflphone-server", but "sflphone", 
and the clients are made as subpackages which care the main package name as  
prefix, thus "sflphone-kde" and so on. Otherwise, if I call the main rpm 
package "sflphone-common" (which is not the whole truth, because it contains 
also the clients made from the same spec), I got to use %package -n to not 
automatically use the "sflphone-common" prefix and getting something as 
"sflphone-common-kde" and similar. On the other hand, I do not want to break 
naming conventions which have been already introduced in some distribution. At 
openSUSE I haven't found any SFLphone package to this time.

But these are only naming conventions. I think it will be better to have it in 
one spec file as long as you provide one big tarball for all the code for 
being able to use the original tarball and not dividing the tarball into 
particular pieces (common, client-X, client-Y) manually, before.

I would solve this rather over dependencies, for instance if installing 
sflphone (common), the recommending or requiring one of the clients. And vice 
versa, a client requires sflphone (common). There should be a way.