Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438608 --- Comment #5 from Matthias Saou <matthias@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-08-08 07:12:25 EDT --- To reply to the last comment, the "elisa-common" package is a hack to break the circular dependency that exists. Here's the problem : You need to install elisa before you can "build" and install the plugins. Installing from source, this isn't really a problem. But from packages, it is, as normal users will want to install only "elisa" and have it pull in all the plugins it needs to run. So for packages, we need elisa to require the plugins, but we need the plugins to buildrequire elisa. Circular dependency. To break that circular dependency, I've split out most of the "elisa" files into a bogus "elisa-common" package, which doesn't require the plugins. To build the plugins, this is fine. To make it more obvious, I've used a virtual provides/requires of "elisa-devel", but haven't named the package "devel" since it will be installed for normal runtime. I've double checked, and the "elisa-common" package doesn't require the plugins, and it shouldn't as explained above. I don't know how you ran into a problem here. The only drawback I can see here is that after removing "elisa", the plugins will be gone, but not the "elisa-common" package. The only solution I can think of would be to duplicate the files currently in "elisa-common" in "elisa" and rename the "common" to "devel". We'd have two packages nearly identical, with one used only for building the plugins. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review