https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2343832 Sam Day <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #2 from Sam Day <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- I'd appreciate some advice on how to proceed with the OSK dependency. f-r-s has picked up on the fact that this package is depending on `/usr/share/applications/sm.puri.OSK0.desktop`. What I want here is for phrog to depend on *any* phosh OSK to be installed. Currently there's squeekboard and I've got an open review request for phosh-osk-stub (BZ#2343212). I've proposed changes to both phosh and squeekboard packages to use the alternatives system to manage the `sm.puri.OSK0.desktop` file: * https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/squeekboard/pull-request/5 * https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2343212 Perhaps I should amend squeekboard and phosh-osk-stub to `Provides: phosh-osk` or some kind of virtual name? -- 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=2343832 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202343832%23c2 -- _______________________________________________ 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
