On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Vadym Chepkov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Oct 12, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Vadym Chepkov wrote: > >> >> On Oct 12, 2010, at 1:43 PM, Fabio M. Di NItto wrote: >> >>> >>> what distribution are you looking at? In Fedora, where the spec file was >>> first done as template for others to use and modify as needed, it's >>> pretty much mandatory to have the subpackage Require the main package. >>> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#RequiringBasePackage >>> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines#Things_To_Check_On_Review >>> >>> "SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base >>> package using a fully versioned dependency. [21]" >>> >>> If all the packages you mention above do not Require the main package, >>> either they have an exception from the Fedora Board, or they are not >>> strictly following the Fedora packaging guidelines. >> > … > >> I have asked the author of the guidelines, Tom Callaway, hopefully he will >> respond. >> >> Vadym >> > > > Here is Tom's response: > " > I would agree with you. In the specific case of a %{name}-libs > subpackage, which only contains shared libraries, that package does not > need to explicitly depend on %{name} = %{version}-%{release} (unless > there is some other technical reason, of course). > > I've proposed amending the Packaging Guidelines to reflect common sense > here: > > https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/20 > > The Fedora Packaging Committee should address this next week. > > ~spot > " > > Seems "common sense" to him too
Since when was common sense a basis for reading distro packaging policies? I'm just grateful they don't make us create a separate subpackage for each library because they have different version numbers. *cough* debian *cough* _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
