RPM Spec file that demonstrates the modularity of Smart

[Anders F Björklund]

Grant McWilliams wrote:

>> The currently packaged form into smart, smart-update, smart-gui and
>> ksmarttray subpackages is already considered too fragmented by many
>> users.
>>
>> The current subpackaging is actually done in a way to have the main
>> smart package pull in only the really required bits compared to pygtk
>> or kde bits needs by the graphical subpackages.

> I'd like to see the number of packages go down, not up. As
> Albert Einstein would say, "as simple as possible but not simpler".

The suggested addition for smart-1.2 was to rename "smart-gui" to
"smart-gtk", and then have both "smart-gtk" and "smart-qt" provide
the "smart-gui" dependency. That would still keep the dependencies
down, and only pull PyGTK and PyQt when actually required / wanted.

"smart-update" has a suid root binary, which might not be desired
everywhere. And the tray/panel should definitely be separate, IMHO.


Ubuntu has "smartpm" (smart-gtk), "smartpm-core" (smart:bin) and
"python-smartpm" (smart:lib) - mostly out of python policies afaik.
Don't think it's necessary to split the "smart" Fedora package up,
unless required to support several Python versions or whatever...

In the Fedora package there is also a "smart-config" dependency,
for fedora-package-config-smart (or centos-package-config-smart),
holding the "release" - channel information for the os channels.
I think Ubuntu uses the aptsync plugin instead of .channel files.

--anders