seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 21:06 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le jeudi 17 mai 2007 à 21:14 +0200, Hans de Goede a écrit :
I'm open to suggestions to doing this smarter. And ship a private copy of
Vera.ttf is not a good suggestion!
At least require a DejaVu variant as Vera is been quietly deprecated.
or a virtual provides in both packages.
A virtual provide would only work if they both provided the same files, which
afaik the don't.
I agree with the goal to not use to much file dependencies. But in this case it
really is a file dependency, the packages don't care where
/usr/share/fonts/bitstream-vera/Vera.ttf comes from as long as its there.
Offtopic: this reminds me of a discussion I had at fosdem with Jeff Johnson,
with regards to some new rpm functionality he is working on, where dependencies
like this could not only be resolved by other packages, but by the file
actually being there, iow if the user put it there manually it would be fine
too. I know this is offtopic, but it nicely demonstrates the point I'm trying
to make, the fact that this really is a file dependency, I don't want fackae
foo, I just want the file : /usr/share/fonts/bitstream-vera/Vera.ttf, and it
should be a ttf font, which is kinda har to express in rpm.
Regards,
Hans
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
