On Friday 20 April 2007, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 01:13:41PM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 01:06:51PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > The guidelines intention is to recommend "foo-static". > > > > Ok, so what about rpmlint warnings? Ignore them or bugzilla rpmlint? > > IIRC Ville wanted to speak with upstream to allow *.a in > *-static. Maybe he'll comment on what rpmlint currently does and > whether upstream perhaps rejected this, or perhaps whether my memory > is segfaulting. :) rpmlint 0.80 treats *-static as devel packages, earlier versions don't. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
