https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1824156



--- Comment #14 from Simone Caronni <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Eric Sandeen from comment #12)
> btw exfat-utils has now been renamed exfatprogs as of v1.0.2:
> 
> ===
> This is the second release of exfatprogs since the initial version(1.0.1).
> We have received various feedbacks and patches since the previous release
> and applied them in this release. Thanks for feedback and patches!
> 
> According to Goldwyn's comments, We renamed the project name from
> exfat-utils to exfatprogs. However, There is an opinion that just renaming
> the name is not enough. Because the binary names(mkfs.exfat, fsck.exfat)
> still are same with ones in current exfat-utils RPM package.
> ===
> 
> I'll probably chime in on that thread, I think keeping the binary names is
> the only way to go, but a conflicts: tag in packaging might be wise?
> 
> -Eric

As you wish, but then in the end the conflict in the package is the same as the
conflict in the files. I would still favour obsoleting/provides exfat-utils.


-- 
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]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]

Reply via email to