I uploaded 3.2.0-4 rpms before you posted that mtools should be in the client package, not the server. So, of course, I put the dependency in the server package. I've built a -5 rpm suite that has the dependency in the client package (untested, but the *only* change is the dependency). Do you want that update posted? I can hold until I test further, or until there are more significant changes than that (e.g. see below). I was really more motivated to get the docco available in the RPM rather than the dependency issue.
Yeah, I wouldn't worry about posting -5's just for that dependency. I expect we'll be releasing a 3.2.1 fairly quickly, and it will catch that change in the spec file.
I was also wondering if I should move the documentation from the -server package to -common? This would place the docs on client systems as well as servers. I don't have a strong opinion on this. Does anyone else?
I would say that that makes sense. Or in a seperate -doc package, as we have on debian, but that's probably unnecessary for the rpms.
Dannf, packaging guru, do you agree on the -common vs. -doc bit?
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Brian Elliott Finley Argonne, MCS Division Phone: 630.631.6621 http://thefinleys.com
gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 10F8EE52
---------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ Sisuite-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-devel
