On Sat, 2013-05-18 at 13:41 -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 05/18/2013 01:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Sat, 2013-05-18 at 06:18 -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > > Well, there may have been some signals crossed somewhere. I've been part > > of the discussion about reducing the size of the desktop spin. > > selinux-policy-devel doesn't look bad to me, the one that looks like a > > problem is policycoreutils-devel > Yep. I was thinking of policycoreutils-devel and wrote > selinux-policy-devel in the report instead. Sorry for the confusion And to make things clear there - the fact that policycoreutils and policycoreutils-devel are split is not exactly a problem, in fact it's making things better, it's just the nomenclature is off and it seems like the dependency of pcu-devel on selinux-policy-devel is sub-optimal and might be improveable. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
