Hi, Ian McInerney wrote: > Why not split the cvs package like git and create a cvs-core package that > actually contains the cvs executables/files and then only BR/require that > from git/git-cvs? That would be the more immediate solution that prunes the > affected packages from the xinetd orphaning by quite a lot. The cvs package _is_ split up. Git doesn't BR cvs-inetd or anything. The reason this dep chain is in the list is because *iff* xinetd were to be removed (without cvs dropping the BR), then cvs would be removed, taking git along with it (if git did not drop its cvs BR). That's certainly _not_ going to happen though. ;) I don't think there's much doubt about the ease of a fix, should one be required. If xinetd goes away, cvs can simply drop the inetd subpackage. But someone may pick up xinetd and make that moot. Failing either of those outcomes, git can drop its cvs BR & subpackage easily. -- Todd
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
