Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xdvik - An X viewer for DVI files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427667 ------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx 2008-01-14 17:39 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > A first note is that it seems to me that 22.84.12 should > be obsoleted (if xdvi is). > Yes, sorry, I meant Obsoletes: xdvi <=22.84.12 > The issue I see is that the xdvi package exists and it > is a different upstream. However I can't see a reason why > somebody would want to package it. Yes.. but it's dead upstream ... no release since 2004... xdvik is essentially upstream now. > In fact it may have been > unfortunate that I (I think it was me in a patch fro > texlive.spec) called it xdvi and not xdvik. However it is > not that obvious since it certainly makes sense to have > yum install xdvi installs xdvik. > Yes, we definately want yum install xdvi to do the right thing. > Maybe one possibility could be to drop completely the > Obsoletes: xdvi > > and leave > Provides: xdvi = %{version}-%{release} > I am happy with that... > This will hurt the rawhide texlive users but maybe it would be > better. I don't think it will, since the xdvi in rawhide is at version 22.84.12-8.fc9, so rawhide users will just see an updated package. Did I miss something? On balance i think the last choice is probably best -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review