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: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-23 18:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > Can you elaborate on why an unversioned .so cannot go into the main package? The simple answer is that the guidelines demand it: see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines: - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. The more difficult answer is that I don't completely understand it myself; I believe it has to do with the fact that applications must link against the versioned .so, leaving the unversioned one unneeded for regular operation, along with the question of what the unversioned .so would mean in the face of a future potential compat-libreadlinejava080 package. -- 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