Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: sox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226425 ------- Additional Comments From kwizart@xxxxxxxxx 2008-02-16 09:10 EST ------- Hi Jirka, I was thinking about using pkgconfig with sox-devel (and Requiring the related libs there.) For what i've seen in devel, it only uses pkg-config at library detection. Well, see the attached patch.(which i don't expect to use unless approved by the upstream project). There is maybe a better way to do this (i meant to use AM_LDFLAGS to avoid_version seems a little hacky). Also it would be good to provide a pkg-config detection for packages that need sox-devel (Work in progress, but it will depend on the used scheme, either with or without libltdl, which change a lot). As a third part packager; I would provide a sox-libs-freeworld for the libmad and others libs. Maybe that would need to define a more accurate %file section for {_libdir}/sox/*.so . For the amr part , as this is nonfree but also non-redistributable, I cannot hold any sox-libs-nonfree package and that would be cared at end-users rebuild of the freeworld package. for info i've made a nosrc package for amr{nv,wb}, you can see here: http://kwizart.free.fr/fedora/nosrc/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review