On 9/9/05, Ricardo Veguilla González <veguilla@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Because control-center requires xscreensaver. perhaps control-center needs to be requiring xscreensaver-base instead now. I think control-center still requiring xscreensaver is an oversight. > If I also provide xscreensaver-base, Here's what I'm getting at... what you want to do cannot involve providing "xscreensaver" as long as xscreensaver-base is obsoleting "xscreensaver" I can't see a good reason for control-center to still be requiring xscreensaver over xscreensaver-base. If you want the parallel install of both to work you avoid providing "xscreensaver" and you provide "xscreensaver-base" instead. If you want people to be able to remove xscreensaver and use gnome-screensaver exclusively, I think you'll have to convince the control-center packager to require xscreensaver-base instead of xscreensaver... assume there are no actual file conflicts and the only problem really is the obsoleting action. how xscreensaver-base provides and obsoletes "xscreensaver" is there to provide some measure of backwards compatibility. Moving forward...nothing new should be built providing or requring "xscreensaver". What you are seeing is one of the side-effects of this approach. As soon as control-center catches up and starts requiring "xscreensaver-base" you can have both cases that you are looking for. -jef -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
