https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979124



--- Comment #56 from Erik Schilling <[email protected]> ---
> The point of the warning is to catch stuff that installs only architecture-
> independent stuff into %{_libdir}, which would be better put into %{_datadir}
> or %{_libexecdir}. But this is not the case here, the warning is a false
> positive (and since it's an obvious case, it should be reported as a bug to
> rpmlint, really).
Thanks a lot for the explanation. Tagged the mail as todo so I do not forget
reporting the issue against rpmlint.

> Copy&paste error there.
Thanks a lot. Fixed locally. Waiting for more severe issues for kicking off
builds.

> I really think the packaging of qbs in Fedora is over complicated.
I am sorry to hear that. I was still open to take input on this subpackage
splitups. But after I pointed out my points I did not receive any input on it
so I sticked on it.

As you can see this new release already adds two new modules... If I would put
everything into the same package I fear that it would be pretty annoying later
on and splitting it later again would be a lot more complex (How could I even
split out a module later? One person might need it so to prevent confusion
during the update I would need to add a Requires: to it. But another person
might have never used it and would end up installing the subpackage he does not
need).

But still thanks a lot for all the input so far!

Regards,
Erik

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to