Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477416 --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> 2009-01-21 17:58:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > Whoops, broken deps. Fixed: > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=79653 1. you really need to check your font family names in gnome-font-viewer or fontforge as explained in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy You'd see that "centuryschl" is actually "Century Schoolbook L", so the corresponding subpackage should be lilypond-century-schoolbook-l-fonts (didn't check the others, please do so) 2. your font subpackages should require %{name}-fonts-common and not %{name} so the fonts can be installed without dragging the app in 3. I doubt providing lilypond-fonts <= 2.12.1-1 is of any use; yum only needs the obsoletes for a working upgrade path, and no other package will have deps on lilypond-fonts, no? 4. The font package descriptions do not tell users a lot about the fonts, but I guess this is a minor point for you 5. There does not seem to be any obvious typo in the upgrade path rules, of course the proof is in the pudding, do test it your side (install the f10 rpm, put your new rpms in a local dir with a createrepo, point yum to it and see what happens) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-fonts-bugs-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-fonts-bugs-list
