package installation statistics

Hello, do Fedora have some statistics of how many users install concrete fedora package? Ivana Hutarova Varekova -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: mandb behavior

for the bug report. Ivana Hutarova Varekova -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: mpfr soname bump in rawhide

On 11/30/2010 07:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 18:03 +0100, Ivana Varekova wrote: Hello, mpfr-3.0.0 is now build to rawhide branch and soname is bumped to 4.0.0 there. MPFR 3.0.0 is binary incompatible with previous versions and also is not completely API compatible.

Re: should man-pages-* have Requires: man?

just for the purpose to fix possible problem if the maintainer of packages uses this flag in fc13 too, it have not any other reason there now. Ivana Hutarova Varekova -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

should man-pages-* have Requires: man?

* packages. From my point of view man dependency should be in all of them. Any ideas? Ivana Hutarova Varekova -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: man-db vs. man

Hello, sorry for the late response, I'm the man package maintainer and I agree with the idea to switch from man to man-db. I just sent a mail to fedora list about it. Thanks. Ivana On 02/12/2010 05:53 PM, Till Maas wrote: Hiyas, according to the man-db[0] homepage all/most other major

Re: switching from man to man-db

Yes I agree, the idea is to add obsolete/provides. Man-db have the a lot of functionality which is the same with man, so theer are a lot of conflicts and if the package will replace man, the it has no sense to rename or remove conflicting files from man-db. Ivana Hutarova Varekova -- devel