Am 16.03.2012 09:58, schrieb Simone Caronni:
> Makes sense?
> 
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=bacula.git;a=commitdiff;h=964c4995e7d7c6cb820ecbb4b0c4ed58b1cbb4ed

Looks good.

> I removed all *sql libs in my system and tried to install client and
> console, no libraries are pulled in.

Very nice, thanks a lot. I'll gladly test as soon as it shows up in the
repo.

>> I got the point, I think that can be done without making things too
>> complicated. Would it be okay if the actual list of packages would end
>> up like this?
>>
>> bacula-client.x86_64
>> bacula-common.x86_64
>> bacula-console.x86_64
>> bacula-console-bat.x86_64
>> bacula-director.x86_64
>> bacula-docs.noarch
>> bacula-libs.x86_64 <-- remove libbacsql*, libbaccats* and the alternatives
>> bacula-storage.x86_64
>>
>> PLUS:
>>
>> bacula-libs-sql.x86_64 <-- this would contain libbacsql* and
>> libbaccats* required by Director and Storage Daemons

That's perfectly fine.

Thanks again,
Tilman

-- 
Tilman Schmidt
Phoenix Software GmbH
Bonn, Germany

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF email is sponsosred by:
Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users