[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=523877

--- Comment #17 from Chen Lei <supercyper@xxxxxxx> 2010-03-11 01:39:38 EST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Take that with a grain of salt, please. It's a draft and not a mandatory item
> in the guidelines. Ordinary binary executables don't cause multilib conflicts.
> Tim is right about that.
> Further, there's a conditional: *If* you have a file conflict in a library
> package due to other files in the same package, splitting of the libs into
> their own package *may* help. Doing that doesn't prevent all multiarch
> problems, though, such as conflicts in the -devel package.    

You are right Michael, this is not a mandatory item in reviewing a package. We
should be lenient with multilib conflicts if the package mainly act as a
program such as qt-creator.

Howerver, the main role of CBFlib is act as a dynamic lib, the programs
included in the CBFlib are only utilities. So I think we should be careful with
multilib conflicts in CBFlib, it's easy to split out a -utils subpackage.

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]