Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ctapi-common - Common infrastructure for CT-API modules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190911 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta@xxxxxx 2006-05-06 15:00 EST ------- The dir based dependency is doable, but it'll break as soon as some other package owns %{_libdir}/ctapi. We can make sure it doesn't happen within FE, but I can imagine a 3rd party package doing that eg. for cross distro compatibility issues. I find the provided thingy less likely to break, but I don't have too strong opinion on this. Regarding README, I have both i386 and x86_64 ctapi-common with differing README timestamp installed here, and rpm doesn't raise a conflict and even rpm -V is silent for both. Simply having it as SourceX isn't enough to guarantee the same timestamp in packages due to eg. cvs checkouts, it would have to be put into a tarball or touch'd with a timestamp to ensure that. I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble, especially considering that rpm doesn't seem to have any issues with the current implementation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review