Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 16:41 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> > It's not to be considered a bug, AFAIK. We don't stipulate that >> > development packages be installable side-by-side in this way, we only >> > stipulate that for library packages where there's a need for it. >> > There's no particular use case where you absolutely need both -devel >> > packages installed at once. >> > >> I believe this is incorrect. devel packages are supposed to be multilib >> installable. There's two things that are two files that conflict above >> and there's two different fixes for each. > > I'm happy to be wrong :), but is this documented anywhere? That's why I > thought the opposite was the case, I couldn't find anything to this > effect in the packaging documentation when I was starting out. > > It seems like a lot of work for very little return if it is our policy, > especially fiddling around with *-config and the like executables, which > are far from uncommon...what's the use case for multilib -devel > packages? When is it actually useful to have both arches installed at > once for a -devel package? > Fortunately, it seems that this particular case (2 file conflicts) was pretty easy to fix (just remove the offending files). Looking at emacs-23.1, it appears to be using pkgconfig, and libotf already was installing a proper libotf.pc. I'm hoping /usr/bin/libotf-config isn't essential. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
