On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 09:50 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 09:44:36AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > > > 2. When a package goes from only providing static libraries to providing > > some shared libraries (but not all), we want to be able to track these. > > Does it happens? This happens all the time. The critical case would be the opposite: A package going from providing shared libs to providing static libs only. I have never seen this happen, but provides the craziness of some upstreams, I would not exclude this to happen. > I guess that this is raised by a real life example, but > is there more than one package providing some library as shared+static > and some only as static? This isn't much of a problem. * If a library's client package BR:'s *-devel, it will pick up the shared library during the next rebuild. * If a library's client package BR:'s *-static, it will bomb out during the next rebuild. The only issue is library-client packages not being automatically notified that they might need to be rebuilt. To me, this is a negligible, minor issue, your proposal is too heavy weight for to find it appropriate. We have way more serious packaging issues than this minor detail. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
