On 02/12/2009 01:24, Brian Long wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky <atr...@kosowsky.org
<mailto:atr...@kosowsky.org>> wrote:
That being the case it seems like the best solution is to either
eliminate PIL if python-imaging has all the necessary functionality or
alternatively make up a new python-imaging-extras package that just
includes the files that may be missing in the Fedora version (or
alternatively ask the Fedora maintainers to include them).
From my limited perspective, I agree. Axel, are you opposed to this
solution or are you just waiting for a solution to be developed (i.e. a
new spec for python-imaging-extras)?
That all sounds wonderful, but I've a feeling atrpms' PIL really is
required for older releases, like EL4 and 5. I wonder whether the trick
might perhaps be to tweak the rpm spec so the f10+ packages can be
content with Fedora's python-imaging? I'm afraid I've little idea how to
do this myself...
Cheers,
John.
_______________________________________________
atrpms-users mailing list
atrpms-users@atrpms.net
http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
