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=772284 --- Comment #7 from Jiri Pirko <[email protected]> 2012-01-12 18:08:03 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > I updated spec and libnl version as well. The main difference is to put > > libnl3 > > files into /usr/ and to include -cli as separate package: > > > > Spec diff URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpirko/libnl3/libnl3.spec.diff > > Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpirko/libnl3/libnl3.spec > > SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jpirko/libnl3/libnl3-3.2.5-1.fc16.src.rpm > > > > Successfully built in koji > > (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3642248) > > > > I successfully built and run my libteam library against this. > > We've put the libs into /lib to make sure we can still boot the system when > /usr is network mounted; NetworkManager for example requires libnl and if it > were in /usr we wouldn't be able to boot a network-mounted-/usr system. Well I was told that eventually all libs will end up to be in /usr/lib. So that was the reason why I changed libnl3 files to be there. Dan Horak told me that as well. Anyway, if you have strong feeling about them being in /lib, please move them there. > > I wasn't quite sure what to do about the cli tools so thanks for handling > that. Well in debian for example they fragment this even more. They have separate package for nf, route, cli, utils as well. But I think that the partitioning I proposed is good enough. > Can we keep the libraries in /lib or /lib64 for now to match the packaging of > libnl 1.x? -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
