On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:15:26AM -0800, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
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 :)
Once you go beyond -devel, -docs and -libs, sub-RPM naming is almost[1] entirely arbitrary, and at the discretion of the package maintainer With regards, Daniel [1] caveat: programming language specific guidelines may apply -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|