On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Mar 23 septembre 2008 11:54, Panu Matilainen a écrit :
Sure it would be possible to teach rpm to grok the name.arch syntax
for
(build)requires too, but it would require changing every depsolver to
understand it too, and *that* would be incompatible change in spec
syntax
as well. Whereas the new provide introduces precisely zero
incompatibilities.
But that would fix the problem once and for all wouldn't it? Are the
other solutions so fool-proof they won't need to be revised anyway?
Plain name.arch syntax in dependencies has it's own problems, see the
sub-thread starting here:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-August/msg00056.html
That's not to say support for it couldn't be added but using it would
cause a huge incompatibilities all over the place for little gain.
- Panu -
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
