On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 12:16:40PM -0400, Michal Nowak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Do you thing it could be possible to avoid such conflict on upstream
> basis?
Unlikely, the "conflict" is by design.
> Giving example, to install event.h, ev.h and ev++.h to /usr/include/libev
> by default?
Tha
- "Matt Tolton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not just leave out event.h? That's just for libevent
> compatibility.
Thanks, that was my original decision.
Is it libev.pc worth creating, then?
___
libev mailing list
libev@lists.schmorp.de
http:/
Why not just leave out event.h? That's just for libevent compatibility.
On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Michal Nowak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings list.
>
> I am packaging libev into Fedora. During package review [1] we found
> out that there's name conflict between libevent (already in
Greetings list.
I am packaging libev into Fedora. During package review [1] we found
out that there's name conflict between libevent (already in Fedora) and
libev (now in the process of adding to Fedora) in case of event.h, which's
name is contained in both source packages and which, both, by defa
