On 9/16/25 2:33 PM, George N. White III wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 8:31 PM Dave Close <d...@compata.com
<mailto:d...@compata.com>> wrote:
Samuel Sieb wrote:
> For example I have this:
> /usr/lib/.build-id/06/2c544875e9e66357e278e0aa06b8ac395f9251 ->
> ../../../../usr/lib64/ImageMagick-7.1.1/modules-Q16HDRI/coders/
heic.so
> It's dangling because I haven't installed the "heic" module for
> ImageMagick that would provide that library.
Perhaps not directly related to this question, but I've wondered why a
packager would put such links in the "parent" package and not in the
packages containing the targets of the links. Why invite this sort of
seeming trouble that can confuse users?
Packagers should not be making changes to other packages. That would move
the potential confusion to packagers. Packager A would need to determine
if package
B's package needs symlinks to their packages. Packager B would need to
deal with
"surprise" appearance of symlinks in her package, notify Packager A when
the need
for a symlink for A's package ends (to switch to Packager C's new
improved package
that has functionality not present in Packager A's package).
That's not the situation here. The "heic" package is a subpackage
generated at the same time as the main one from the same source. It's
just an optional install.
--
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
