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=469972 Lubomir Rintel <lkund...@v3.sk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #12 from Lubomir Rintel <lkund...@v3.sk> 2009-01-01 11:23:37 EDT --- Ping The .so file should really go to the main package and the static library should be eliminated, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exclusion_of_Static_Libraries Ville: By the way -- is it ok for a shared library to have no soname? Without it we can't depend on exact ABI version. Probably the right way to fix it to persuade upstream into using a SONAME themselves (they already consider package versions to be API versions, according to comments in source code). But anyway, if upstream did not do that, shouldn't we just make up a soname? -- 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-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
