On Tuesday 28 November 2006 00:48, Peter Gordon wrote: > In and of itself, it is *only* a development package, similar to the GNU > toolchain (gcc/binutils/etc). Hence, (as I see it) there is no need for > the -devel naming since it does not have a corresponding runtime-only > component. Except that we use the -devel packages as indications of what should be multilib. Since your package could be used in multilib development, perhaps it would be better to name it -devel. As it stands we have to maintain a whitelist of things that don't have a -devel name in order to make them multilib. Such hand done lists are surely to break (as they have in the past) or fall out of sync between tools such as push scripts and update tools, etc... -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpeJt4OFgoT6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
