-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christian Morales Vega wrote: | 2008/7/13 Christian Morales Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: |> With the new lame version the package has been splitted to follow |> shared libraries packaging policy. But now "lame" package requires |> both libmp3lame0 and libmp3lame-devel. |> |> I don't see how libmp3lame-devel could be needed. And |> # readelf -d `which lame` | grep NEEDED |> 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libncurses.so.5] |> 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libm.so.6] |> 0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6] |> |> libmp3lame0 neither is (should?). |> | | Forget it, I just read the original announce...
;) It is only needed for backwards compatibility with our spec files. Once we've fixed them, I'll re-build lame to remove the libmp3lame-devel dependency. BUT... I was a bit in a hurry. Thinking of it.. it's not needed at all. The existing packages will still work (even with a "Requires:lame", as that will also require the shlib package), and the Requires:libmp3lame-devel is only needed when building a package from now on. So we just have to think of changing BuildRequires: lame to BuildRequires: libmp3lame-devel when we build new releases from now on, when needed. Hence, I'm going to submit a new build of lame that doesn't require the - -devel subpackage. cheers - -- ~ -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ ~ /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ~ _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIejM9r3NMWliFcXcRAqzxAKCcvGrslYUtwZNJ+nn9QORhdhQucgCdG0rb sSWUVolbtmnGrIybd9siEUE= =2heG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Packman mailing list Packman@links2linux.de http://212.112.227.138/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman