On Wednesday 10 January 2007 16:35, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > I just wanted to remind folks that FESCo would really like for us to > finish up guidelines for conflicts (and Conflicts:) soon. Not much > has happened to the draft since it was presented. > > The discussion I actually recall revolved around the suggestions in > the "Conflicting Files" section: > > man pages should probably go into different "sections" (like > Coin2-devel and Inventor-devel) instead of being renamed. > > I recall objection to using "alternatives" for conflicting binaries. > > There's probably plenty I don't recall, however. We really should try > to finish this up and present it to the various committees next week. What about the situation where Foo conflicts with bar <= 1.0, but Foo doesn't require bar to run? A Requires: bar > 1.0 doesn't work here, can a conflicts be used in this case? Is this an acceptable situation for the list at the bottom of the page? -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgp1PpXwSYEDi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
