On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 15:16 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 16:18:21 -0400, > Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > >On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 14:46 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1154154 is a request to provide > >> a generic-release-workstation (sub)package in order to allow for > >> convenient remixing of a debranded Fedora Workstation. > >> > >> It seemed odd that firewalld-config-workstation would require > >> system-release-workstation and if this were to be done we'd need to be > >> sure not to break Fedora composes. I was hoping to hear some comments > >> from the workstation group in the ticket. > > > >firewalld-config-workstation requires system-release-workstation > >specifically to enable the creation of generic-release-workstation > >packages. (Both generic-release-workstation and > >fedora-release-workstation would Provides: system-release-workstation) > > I was thinking that that was probably the case with using system in the > name. Though I was also wondering why the dependency was there at all. > (Though that is moot if it is OK to add a generic version.) For details on that, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Per-Product_Configuration
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
