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=497646 Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG --- Comment #28 from Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]> 2009-06-22 08:43:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #27) > Nicolas: was there a package in common use or in fedora that was renamed when > it came into fedora? If so, then it needs to have an obsolete This entry has derived massively from the original subject. The original report was: Fedora upgrade path is broken because a Fedora package has been split, and a third-party package depended on it => NOTOURBUG, we've fixed our packages, and have no control of what third-parties do. If our upgrade path was broken for a package as massively deployed as liberation bugzilla would overflow with problem reports. Third-party packages should not expect Fedora font package names to live forever, and a release change is the right moment to break compat on this front Then someone noticed the spec declared some explicit conflicts. As far as I know they were added to help yum during groupinstalls (in the course of resolving bug #474514). If you confirm they are not actually needed we'll remove them. -- 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
