https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174408 --- Comment #2 from Šimon Lukašík <slukasik@xxxxxxxxxx> --- First couple of ideas: - There is no documentation for each plug-in. It is not the must for me, but it would be great to have a few words about each plug-in. - name of library: libbd, I am afraid to use libbd as library name. Light search on web for libdb gives some results. What do you think about possible collisions? - package name is libblockdev - lib name is bd. - header files are in blockdev directory I am not sure what can break if those are not consistent. - Quoting the Fedora guidelines: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} - requires from libblockdev-plugins-all should imho also put the fully versioned dependency in. What if I want to install libblockdev-plugins-all.i686 on my box? - spell-check says that metapackage is not word, 'meta-package' will do it. What are your thoughts, Vraťo? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review