On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:33 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 03. 03. 21 12:49, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> Compat package prepared.
>
> Package autoconf269-2.69-1 provides:
>
> /usr/bin/autoconf269
> /usr/bin/autoheader269
> /usr/bin/autom4te269
> /usr/bin/autoreconf269
> /usr/bin/autoscan269
> /usr/bin/autoupdate269
> /usr/bin/ifnames269
> ...
>
> Parallel installation successful.
>
> Any suggestions/concerns are welcome.
My concerns are:
1) Why 269 and not 2.69?
Just a naming convention, if needed can be easily changed
2) Is the parallel installability worth the trouble of different names?
It is up to us to discuss this.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
