Re: [PATCH 0/7] spec: Decompose the daemon subpackage

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 03:19:31PM -0700, Jim Fehlig wrote: > On 12/11/22 10:46, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > I think we should just have a libvirt-daemon-common package that > > includes what you currently have put into the libvirt-daemon-client > > package plus these files, and have all hypervisor drivers depend on > > it directly. > > Taking a cue from the storage driver, I called it libvirt-daemon-core > (patches 4-6) in the original RFC > > https://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2022-November/235924.html > > But I'm fine with libvirt-daemon-common too :-). I'll change it in V2 while > addressing the other comments. I wasn't unable to find a document that contains a formal policy on this, but my understanding is that foo-core is a stripped-down version of foo that only contains the very basic functionality, while foo-common is stuff needed by foo and doesn't do anything useful on its own. Based on this reading, libvirt-daemon-driver-storage-core and libvirt-daemon-common are the appropriate names for the respective packages. Anyone with actual RPM packaging experience, please call me out if I'm spouting nonsense :)