https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1788327 --- Comment #8 from Raphael Groner <projects.rg@xxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #6) > There is an issue if you have a package that will provides libGL.so.1. True. Maybe rename this file and let clients explicitly link to the other library name? … > Best would be to port this application to libglvnd so it don't have to > override libGL.so.1 Can you please guide me how to do? > For information, which use case is behind this package ? I guess you will > rely on a proprietary GLES implementation that lacks libGL.so (like some arm > devices)? Please read the full context, a possible use case is box86, see comment #3 and depending bug for another review request (but still as placeholder, will continue that there when this here is approved). > I wonder if this package shouldn't be best in a copr repository... Why? NO doubt, copr is a general useful tool but I'd like to see a package in official repository. -- 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
