Am Montag, den 30.01.2012, 15:06 +0200 schrieb Panu Matilainen: > On 01/30/2012 02:31 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Am Sonntag, den 29.01.2012, 23:38 -0500 schrieb Jon Stanley: > >> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 8:04 PM, Christoph Wickert > >> <christoph.wickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> I wonder if this rule is still needed. I know I'd loose backward > >>> compatibility with older rpm versions, but I don't want make a > >> > >> I agree that a -common subpackage is silly for this, but are any of > >> the RPM versions that this *wouldn't* work with still in supported > >> releases? > > > > Not in Fedora. > > > >> The only one I'd be concerned with is RHEL5, but I think even that > >> works right, no? > > > > I haven't tested it, but based on my experience with multi-arch file > > conflicts I *guess* it will not work on RHEL 5. > > Sharing identical files between packages has always been allowed in rpm, > that's not an issue. Thanks for this clarification, Panu. Before I go ahead and commit my changes, can I have an 'official' statement from the packaging committee? Should I file a trac ticket? Regards, Christoph -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
