On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 21:39:30 +0100 Mike Hearn mike@plan99.net wrote:
We had this problem with Debian, where people didn't install the "utils" package and apps broke mysteriously. Unless you have a lot of experience of Wine debugging you cannot detect this easily ... please, there's no reason to split this stuff up as Wine will load everything in a failsafe fashion so there is no need to mark the package as depending on a million things.
Well from a wine perspective I see that this makes sense, but if you take a look at all the dependencies it is another story... installing wine is one thing... ending up with zillion dependencies is a whole different story for lots of people where e.g. bandwidth is still a problem or which rather want to have a slim system. I as a packager sit between the chairs and in this case I see why splitting up wine made sense in debian and why it made sense for Fedora Extras as well. The question is what to split and what to leave in. The stuff that has been split from just having one 'wine' package is stuff that made sense and in ways interacts best with what Fedora Core ships with the distro. Sure there are improvements to be made and suggestions are always welcome :) but doing it the way it is done now made lots of people happy (and gave me positive feedback).
Out of interest what are the 11 packages?
wine wine-arts wine-capi wine-cms wine-esd wine-jack wine-ldap wine-nas wine-tools wine-twain
These are the 10 packages which are relevant for a 'normal' user where wine and wine-tools are the major ones. They are build from the wine sources (without winemp3). Then there is:
wine-debuginfo wine-devel
These two are more or less only interesting for packagers/developers etc.
For more details take a look here: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/wine/FC-5/?root=extras
And of course build from the wine-docs sources is the wine-docs rpm: wine-docs
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/wine-docs/?root=extras
thanks -mike
no problem.
- Andreas