https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1700559 Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |ajax@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > Provides: xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel intel-gpu-tools > Obsoletes: xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel intel-gpu-tools These should be versioned, in the unlikely event we ever reintroduce packages with those names. Something like: %define provobs_version 2.99.917-42 Provides: xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel = %{provobs_version} Obsoletes: xorg-x11-drv-intel-devel < %{provobs_version} # same for intel-gpu-tools I picked -42 here to be newer than the current intel driver version. > %description > igt-gpu-tools (formally known as intel-gpu-tools) is the standard for writing > test cases for DRM drivers. It also includes a handful of useful tools for > various drivers, such as Intel's GPU tools for i915. "formally" should probably be "formerly" here. > %{_libdir}/intel_aubdump.so > %{_libdir}/libigt.so > %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/intel-gen4asm.pc It's probably overkill to split these out to a devel subpackage since I don't really expect any external projects to use them. However, Fedora really prefers that real DSOs (not -devel symlinks, and not dlopen-only things like DRI drivers) be versioned, even if it's libblah.so.0. Would be good to push that upstream if you can. Debian has a similar policy so this isn't just Fedora being weird. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
