https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2303281 --- Comment #5 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #4) > Ok got that. That's unfortunate but we have to live with it for a while. In > the mean time please take a closer look - maybe there is something which can > be done to fix/overcome it. Upstream tells me that they are working on allowing GAP packages to be split into architecture-specific and noarch parts. That way, we could install only the architecture-specific bits in %{_libdir} and everything else in %{_datadir}. I don't know what kind of timeframe they are looking at, but it's in the pipeline somewhere. > These were my biggest concerns which were explained to me. I don't see any > other issues so this package is > > ================ > === APPROVED === > ================ Thank you very much for the review. I appreciate it. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2303281 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202303281%23c5 -- _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
