On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 08:07 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Hans de Goede wrote: > > > I still see no resolution or any solution in sight for the fact that > > most packages which currently own /usr/share/omf don't require > > scrollkeeper and that thus scrollkeeper owning /usr/share/omf now isn't > > any help at all, and thus all the filed bugs are a bit bogus. > > It's not necessarily that the bugs aren't bogus, it's just not immediately > clear what the best fix/resolution is for packages that don't Requires: > scrollkeeper. Well, if a package has omf files, they should have Requires(post) & Requires(postun) on scrollkeeper. Which prevents scrollkeeper from being removed from the system, unless this behavior has changed in Rawhide. /B -- Brian Pepple <bpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
