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: libFoundation - A free implementation of OpenStep's Foundation Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201000 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-28 22:26 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12) > I'm not sure what impact this would have on other dependent projects, and it's > for fixing something that (currently) isn't broke. I also consulted the > packaging commitee and most agree on that (but we were only 5 out of 10 > present). Sorry, due to an unplanned commitment, I could not make it yesterday. If I had been around, I would have voted against "allowing /usr/include/extensions" > I suggest the following: Let the package pass as is (at least wrt to headers, if > the are other issues, they need to be fixed, of course), and I will take the > header topic upstream. So should a clash with say glibc's assumed future > extensions folder come up, the issue would have been ironed out at the source > and not the package. Do you agree? I don't fully understand what you are trying to say, but the answer probable is "no". IMO, THIS package is misbehaving and therefore MUST be fixed. If other packages contain hard-coded dependencies on this misbehavior, all necessary changes MUST be reflected to them, too. -- 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