> I'll admit that I'm guilty of this when I craft packages targeting
> Fedora. For the most part, it's because I don't have a good reason to
> care about the soversion (aside from making sure it exists). When I'm
> making packages targeting Mageia or openSUSE, I do actually care about
> it, because the library package is supposed to include the soversion
> in the name. Fedora's guidelines don't require the soversion to be
> part of the package name (which I like), but at the same time, it's a
> bit disconcerting that our repository policies and the way Yum/DNF
> work do not allow us to take advantage of RPM's capability to parallel
> install multiple versions of a package with the same name. Provided
> that they don't have file conflicts, I don't see why this isn't
> supported in Yum/DNF. I do understand it adds a bit of burden onto
> Fedora to maintain a multitude of library package versions, but it's
> rather bizarre that Fedora is the only major distribution I know of
> that doesn't have a consistent policy on dealing with cases where
> multiple versions of the same library package must exist (either
> temporarily or permanently). I've seen different conventions used
> across the board, which makes things very confusing...
>
>
This is a can of worms I don't even want to think about. Also, Fedora
does have such a policy, please read the guidelines for compat packages.
John.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
