https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1935650 Pavel Valena <pvalena@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pvalena@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Pavel Valena <pvalena@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Can we depend on versioned library "so file" instead? (That's the preferred way of specifying dependencies AFAIK.) Like in this commit: https://github.com/fedora-distgit/rubygem-ffi-rzmq-core/commit/c0729fb1c3a2f4c5c225addfd3e07bb8de490f1b#diff-4fe66120347be998c33ea765bccd78806cd3ebf6cc7eafef37bf2841fabbb0ec (Yes, we do want that, on purpose.) As there's no binary extension, ``` BuildArch: noarch ``` we need to specify so arch-specific dependencies with richdeps (if libffi...). On the upside, there's no need for the patch. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
