Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Tuesday, May 12 2009, Daniel P. Berrange said: >> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 08:52:01AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: ... >>> is this going to be a subpackage-explosion? for example: >>> >>> uuid.rpm (with the binary tool(s)) >>> uuid-libs.rpm >>> uuid-devel.rpm >>> >>> and so on for each of the above binary+libs? >> IMHO, having separate sub-packages for each of the command line tools >> is overkill. Just put the libraries in -libs & -devel, but keep all >> the binaries in e2fsprogs. This would avoid any multilib issues with >> binaries, and keep the number of sub-packages sane. > > This feels more reasonable anyway. Having binaries in a lib package is > just a little weird Ok, will have to look at the ramifications of this, but sounds reasonable. BTW Richard, sorry it's taken so long to get going on this, I'll really try to get it in early in the F12 cycle, and thanks for the persistent legwork. :) Thanks, -Eric -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
