Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489014 --- Comment #18 from Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala <huzaifas@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-07 03:54:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17) > Why are you doing all those excludes? They are listed in the subpackages, it > should be enough to have them be owned that way. > Well if you see the file list in the gnome-do-plugin rpm it includes all the files, So if i dont put excludes the files would go into both the sub packge as well as the gnome-do-plugin package. Reference: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/beagle/devel/beagle.spec?revision=1.165&view=markup > you may also want to move specific buildrequires into the subpackages, that way > we can do some neat stuff with flags > Make sense, will do that. SPEC: http://huzaifas.fedorapeople.org/spec/gnome-do-plugins.spec However my question is, when the rpm is build from source, you have to build all the sub rpms right? So what is the point in splitting the BRs? > Shouldn't it depend on monodevelop-devel, not that it would make a difference > in finding it. This one smells like a koji error to me, we may need to contact > the koji guys if it presists or ask the mailing list. Does it happen in a >local > mock build as well? Yeah mock is fine. Opened a ticket with buildsys at: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1315 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review