Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888598 --- Comment #2 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #1) > * Why do you especially require gsl-devel%{?_isa}, openfst-devel%{?_isa} in > the devel package? Do you think it is appropriate to add a brief comment as > requested in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires ? Because the header files installed by this package explicitly #include header files provided by the gsl-devel and openfst-devel packages. Furthermore, the RPM dependency generator isn't able to determine those dependencies on its own, so explicit requires are necessary. This is pretty common for -devel packages, so I didn't think it was worth a comment. If you would like a comment, however, I'm happy to add one. > * Shouldn't the sonames be 1.0.3 instead of 0.0.0? > (/usr/lib64/libngram.so.0.0.0) Hmmmmmm.... I see this in src/lib/Makefile.am: libngram_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 0:0:0 So apparently upstream did this on purpose. I don't know why. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=uWEfD1Civl&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review