https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922638 --- Comment #9 from Antonio T. sagitter <trpost@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #8) > (In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #7) > > Issues: > > ======= > > - Package installs properly. > > Note: Installation errors (see attachment) > > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > > > > Problem: conflicting requests > > - nothing provides libsjpeg.so.0.1()(64bit) needed by > > jpegxl-utils-0.3.7-1.fc35.x86_64 > > > > I have two solutions possible for this: build the binaries with static > libraries included in them or unbundle sjpeg and make it a separate package. > What do you think is the best option? I had already made a sjpeg package for > testing but I haven't submitted it yet for review. > > You're already compiling libsjpeg dynamic libraries, you may install them in a private lib directory of jpegxl-libs. Separating sjpeg as new package is another solution, sure, but in my opinion you should be sure that the 'sjpeg' code bundled is in truth constantly upgraded/modified for jpegxl's needs; latest 'sjpeg' code bundled is from a commit of 12h March 2019 (why?). I would ask to upstream. Fron sjpeg side, the code has been recently modified but never stable released. Is it ready for "living" alone? :) -- 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
