Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] rpm: create libvirt-wireshark sub-package

On 12.02.2014 21:15, Eric Blake wrote: >On 02/05/2014 02:51 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 03:15:56PM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: >>>On Fedora 20, with wireshark-devel installed, 'make rpm' failed >>>due to installed but unpackaged files related to wireshark. As >>>F20 is already released without wireshark, I chose to add a new >>>sub-package that is enabled only for F21 and later. Furthermore, >>>all existing wireshark plugins belong to the wireshark package, >>>so I got to invent behavior of how the first third-part wireshark >>>module will behave. >>> >>>* libvirt.spec.in (with_wireshark): Add new conditional. >>>* configure.ac (ws-plugindir): Improve wording. >>> >>>Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>--- >>> >>>I was tempted to push this as a build-breaker fix for 'make rpm', >>>but rpms are close enough to black magic that I decided a review >>>is safer, after all. Tested with both F20 (not built) and F21 >>>(new subpackage built just fine), using normal build of all >>>subpackages and also a build with '%client_only 1' in ~/.rpmmacros >>>to ensure that it indeed works in a client-only setup. >>> >>> configure.ac | 4 ++-- >>> libvirt.spec.in | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >>ACK > >Hmm, should the generic 'libvirt' metapackage also Require: the >libvirt-wireshark subpackage, so that we keep the status quo that >installing just libvirt pulls in all subpackages? > Well, I think we should intentionally break that rule here. Otherwise: yum install libvirt drags in wireshark as a dependency. There wouldn't be anything bad about it, except the wireshark plugin is expected to be used by developers, not an ordinary users. If I were an ordinary user I'd be very curious why I need to install wireshark to run libvirt.