2007/9/17, Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > Why does the -libs package require these tools? > > The .spec doesn't answer that question. > > > > In the other direction, there's a hardcoded strict dependency in > > addition to the automatic soname deps, creating a circle: > > > > $ rpm -qR OpenEXR|grep EXR > > OpenEXR-libs = 1.4.0a-5.fc8 > > > > Conclusively, the split is useless. > > It's cleaner wrt multilib, ie no OpenEXR.i386 in x86_64 repo. But there is a problem if OpenEXR-libs.i386 Requires main.i386 There is at least two solutions if we want multilibs compatibility : 1 - Use main and -devel (with bins and libs in main ), that's mean when a user install a package.i386 that requires OpenEXR.i386, then 2 - Disable libs to Requires main, then apps that links to OpenEXR will need to add Requires: OpenEXR (which will have only bins ). For now i don't know if app are requiring binaries to works... But is there any problem to uses .x86_64 binaries from a i386 program ? Actually when both arch for bin package are installed, preference goes to x86_64 version on x86_64 system... (unless i'm wrong ) Thought there is an 1.6 update of openexr... Rex, do you mind we can have an update ? Nicolas (kwizart ) > (same goes for jasper). > > -- Rex > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
