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=690038 --- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2011-04-27 10:06:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > I contacted upstream about the soname, they accidentally omitted it from the > release. I've patched in a library version and soversion consistent with what > will be added in future releases. OK, that's great. However, is the soversion really supposed to be identical to the package version, i.e. does the library's ABI change with every new release? In this case, all potential packages depending on this library had do be rebuilt every time you update the package. This seems to be a bit odd. > The python bindings can't be built without pygccxml and pyplusplus. Neither of > these python modules are packaged in Fedora. Ah, right. The package looks good now and could be approved. However, please ask upstream to shed some light on their soname scheme, as it could cause some problems in the future. -- 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