On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 15:52:13 +0100, I wrote: > * Early-warning system => "binutils" was closed WONTFIX: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/556040 > I may need some backup in case the reopened ticket will be ignored. Amazing how responsive some maintainers can be if they want to close something as WONTFIX or NOTABUG together with a slap into the face. "They don't make any sense for binutils" is all what Jakub Jelinek added about the current Fedora Packaging Guidelines. Wrong. Certainly binutils-devel could split off its static libraries into a binutils-static package, so anything other than itself must follow the guidelines and "BuildRequires: binutils-static". $ repoquery --whatrequires libbfd-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.so binutils-0:2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.i686 $ repoquery --whatrequires libopcodes-2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.so binutils-0:2.19.51.0.14-34.fc12.i686 -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
