[Bug 1386938] Review Request: libprelude - Prelude Library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1386938



--- Comment #10 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Thomas Andrejak from comment #9)
> - For soname at the end of the subpackage name, this is what other linux
> distribution required, that's why I do it.
Yes, but Fedora doesn't work this way. In Fedora, there normally just one
version of a given library. Everybody upgrades at once. Hence no suffix.

> It make you able to install
> multiple libprelude versions in parallel. Do I really have to make only one
> subpackage with all ".so" files and do not precise the soname in the
> subpackage name ?
Yes.

> - Can you tell which macro you are talking about ?
I think the following macros are unneeded:
%global libname                 libprelude%{major}
%global libcpp                  libpreludecpp%{cppmajor}
%global libnamedevel            libprelude-devel


> - %description is required when you use "%package -n"
OK, let's leave that one for later.

Instead, please explain the difference between package %{libname} and 
package %{libcpp} (see how those macros make everything more obfuscated ;)).
Is there a reason why the second is not merged with the first?

> Thanks for sponsoring :) I will do some reviews this week
Great.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]