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=450527 --- Comment #20 from Tim Niemueller <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-09 13:38:28 EDT --- rpmlint: - zero-length files are auto-generated and therefore not removed - complaint about no-doc is for the -devel sub-package and therefore should be fine, right? paths: You are right, I should rename at least the config path, although it is probably unlikely that you want to use both versions at the same time. However, how do I need to handle this with the .so files? The .so symlinks in the -devel package will conflict, even though the real libraries have proper version suffixes. Is that considered to be correct (package conflict) or do I need to rename the libraries as well (and then the include file path as well)? %fedora guard: I would like to keep those, as we have robots running versions as old as FC3 (and upgrading robots can be a real problem). Is that a "must remove" or "can remove"? -- 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