https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022255 --- Comment #13 from Nils Philippsen <nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Björn "besser82" Esser from comment #12) > (In reply to Nils Philippsen from comment #11) > > Uhm why? I don't see a guideline prescribing that and so that > > %_libdir/pkgconfig doesn't go unowned the package has to either own it (only > > one precedent in F19 according to repoquery) or require pkgconfig which owns > > it officially (more than 100 devel packages on my machine alone). > > Explicit Requires: pkgconfig is needed on <= el5, only, because on any other > dist it will be picked-up correctly by Autorequires. That doesn't seem to be the case, here's the dependencies of the devel subpackage if built without explicitly requiring pkgconfig: nils@gibraltar:~/rpmbuild> rpm -qp --requires /home/nils/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libltc-devel-1.1.1-0.1.fc19.x86_64.rpm libltc(x86-64) = 1.1.1-0.1.fc19 libltc.so.11()(64bit) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 nils@gibraltar:~/rpmbuild> I think that what you described only works if the built library requires another in its pkgconfig file (i.e. the "Requires" line mustn't be empty) -- libltc doesn't need anything else (except libc but that's not pulled in via pkgconfig). -- 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