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=542740 --- Comment #13 from Carl Byington <carl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-12-02 11:19:30 EDT --- I don't see any documentation files specific to the -libs package. Currently f2c does not require f2c-libs, and f2c-libs does not require f2c. Should I add a requires to force one or the other, so that the license files will always get installed? A similar question for mpqc. The only interpackage dependencies are mpqc-devel requires mpqc-libs requires mpqc-data. The license files are installed in mpqc, so if only mpqc-libs is installed, the user has no license files. What is the general approach to such packages with multiple mostly independent subpackages. It seems there are only three choices. Force an artifical dependency on the subpackage that contains the license files, install multiple copies of the license files in each independent subpackage, or allow some subpackages to install with no license files. -- 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