https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833573 --- Comment #10 from David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- I don't think I'd get too worked up about package naming. When the library is pulled in as a runtime dependency, it's referenced by the library name(s): libhogweed.so.2()(64bit) libnettle.so.4()(64bit) And when it's seen in BuildRequires:, it should be referred to as pkgconfig(hogweed) pkgconfig(nettle) In neither case should anyone really care about the *name* of the package. We could call it anything we like, and it wouldn't matter. And likewise in this context it shouldn't matter whether we split it into separate nettle/hogweed packages. If a dependent package has correct BuildRequires on the pkgconfig() objects it needs, it'll be fine. On the topic of splitting nettle/hogweed.... we also need to ship GnuTLS v3, since we're currently shipping a hopelessly out of date GnuTLS v2.12 (bug #726886). And GnuTLS uses hogweed, so I'm not sure how often you'd manage to *avoid* having hogweed installed; it might not be worth splitting them at. But if you feel strongly that it's useful, feel free to make changes to the package (I'll grant you permissions if you aren't a provenpackager). -- 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