https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849384 --- Comment #7 from Aleksei Bavshin <alebastr89@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Bob Hepple from comment #6) > So (unless you object) I'll annotate the spec file accordingly with the > %gpgverify lines commented out and kick off the build when the repos are > ready tomorrow. No objections. GPG verification is not required in the first place, just strongly recommended. And I still need to add gpgverify to some of my own packages :) > hopefully FA-5 will be in fedora by the time this rears its head. Doesn't seem to be that easy. There's a couple dozens of packages that show up in `dnf repoquery --whatdepends fontawesome-fonts --whatdepends fontawesome-fonts-web`. Some of them already expect 5.x (waybar, i3status-rs), a few more could be fixed with fontconfig aliases. And the rest are docs/web applications that refer to the specific font name or use old css/js font wrappers. If it ever gets updated there likely will be compat package for 4.x. -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
