https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018546 Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugs.michael@xxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- > %package -n libmpcdec > Summary: Musepack audio decoding library > Obsoletes: libmpcdec < 1.2.6-13 Package libmpcdec is "License: BSD", because libmpcdec and mpcdec apply those licensing terms. The "Obsoletes" tag here (and in the -devel package) is superfluous. This subpackage "libmpcdec" will update the older package "libmpcdec", because of the higher EVR already. Is this lib from Musepack SV8 even ABI-compatible with SV7 libmpcdec? Isn't even the SONAME _supposed_ to be different already? The spec isn't ready, but the old lib is libmpcdec.so.5, and the spec uses .0 and asks which version is should be. And what about all the dependencies? # repoquery --whatrequires libmpcdec cmus-0:2.5.0-4.fc20.x86_64 gstreamer-plugins-bad-free-0:0.10.23-19.fc20.i686 gstreamer-plugins-bad-free-0:0.10.23-19.fc20.x86_64 k3b-1:2.0.2-18.20130927git.fc20.x86_64 libmpcdec-devel-0:1.2.6-12.fc20.i686 libmpcdec-devel-0:1.2.6-12.fc20.x86_64 libtunepimp-0:0.5.3-23.fc20.i686 libtunepimp-0:0.5.3-23.fc20.x86_64 qmmp-0:0.7.2-1.fc20.i686 qmmp-0:0.7.2-1.fc20.x86_64 vlc-core-0:2.1.0-1.fc20.x86_64 xine-lib-0:1.1.21-8.fc20.i686 xine-lib-0:1.1.21-8.fc20.x86_64 xmms-musepack-0:1.2-13.fc20.x86_64 xmms2-0:0.8-13.fc20.i686 xmms2-0:0.8-13.fc20.x86_64 -- 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