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=781687 --- Comment #6 from Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-01-19 05:06:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > I spoke to Dave Robbillard and he's quite against splitting up the LV2 packages > for whatever reason. Ok, what does he mean by splitting up, does he mean moving the .h file to /usr/include? If that is a problem we can just keep it under %{_libdir}/lv2/ui.lv2 and put a symlink in /usr/include > The spec dictates that a bundle simply owns all of the files in its directory > in this case %{_libdir}/lv2/ui.lv2, thus the reason why the symlink to the > header file is in %{_includedir} and not the other way around. That is fine, but if the header is only used for building c-progs, and not used runtime it should go to the -devel package (as you did). So to summarize I think that what you currently have for lv2-ui is fine, except that the extensions dir should be owned by lv2core, and that you need Requires on lv2core resp. lv2core-devel for dir ownership. ### Which leaves the question of lv2core itself, I believe that /usr/lib64/lv2/lv2core.lv2/lv2.h should be part of -devel there not the main package and that /usr/include/lv2.h should be a symlink not a copy. -- 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