On Thu, 07 Feb 2013 12:16:18 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote: > I'm just guessing here, but it may be that it never occurred to anybody > that you might want to have the manual without the program. Tell the packagers. During initial Fedora Package Review, such problems are often noticed and commented on, but some packagers (re)introduce such a dependency in a subpackage later. Being able to install documentation separately/independently is a good thing. If you examine the audacity.spec file, it contains: # -manual suits either audacity or audacity-freeworld; both create the path: Requires: /usr/bin/audacity The comment doesn't explain why the manual needs the executable. It reads as if the packager thought it was added value, if installing the manual also installs the program. Perhaps that was done only for optimising directory ownership. To have the main package provide several directory entries that are shared with the manual package. Nowadays, the packaging guidelines explicitly permit that multiple packages include the same directory entries, so it would not be a bad thing to do that for audacity-manual, too. http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/audacity as a convenient link to the bug tracker. -- Fedora release 19 (Rawhide) - Linux 3.7.5-201.fc18.x86_64 loadavg: 0.01 0.04 0.05 -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
