https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=835015 --- Comment #7 from Dan Callaghan <dcallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for taking this review, Mario. (In reply to comment #6) > There are still some problems: > > All entries in %doc and the png file appear in both packages. This will > cause a package conflict if someone tries to install both. My proposal: Put > the mentioned files in the base package (which actually doesn't exist yet) > and don't forget to let it be required by both subpackages. Actually there is no conflict if the files are identical, which they always will be since they are built from the same sources. yum/rpm will happily install them both at the same time. I'd rather avoid having a base package if possible, since it makes things messier. Though for a clean upgrade path, I should add an explicit Conflicts for < %{version}%{release}, so that yum knows to upgrade both at the same time (if both are installed). I have added that in -3. > The -gnome package pulls only libpanel-applet-4.so.0 as a dependency, means > that the folder %{_datadir}/gnome-panel/4.0/applets/ needs to be owned. Add > gnome-panel manually, which solves this problem. The same in the -xfce > package, which needs xfce4-panel as a runtime requirement. Good point. Fixed in -3. > After all, > shouldn't be Xmonad to be added as a dependency to the main package? I don't think so... There is no hard requirement for xmonad to be present for the package to work, and the user might be doing something unusual like sending their xmonad log messages over D-Bus over the network, or even just running their own custom xmonad from their home directory or something like that. So I'd rather not Require xmonad when it's not needed. > Maybe we need a way to force the user to don't install the base package > only, which wouldn't make sense. Either -gnome or -xfce should be needed. My > idea: Add a "Provides: xmonad-log-applet-foo" to both packages and vice > versa a "Requires: xmonad-log-applet-foo" to the main package. But I don't > know if Yum can solve this correctly. I assume that the user will be asked > for installing each of the packages. This is the kind of problem we can avoid if there is no base package :-) Updated SRPM/spec: http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/xmonad-log-applet/xmonad-log-applet-2.0.0-3.fc17.src.rpm http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/xmonad-log-applet/xmonad-log-applet.spec -- 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