Miro Hrončok wrote:
> 2) Is the parallel installability worth the trouble of different names?
IMHO, yes. Some projects require developers to run autoconf to pregenerate
the scripts, so they will need to be able to work with more than one
version.
Past autoconf compatibility packages in Fedora have always worked like this,
with suffixed names.
What we could do is adding an additional autoconf2.69-unversioned-commands
subpackage with unversioned symlinks, Requires: autoconf2.69, and Conflicts:
autoconf. That would bring us the best of both worlds: parallel
installability for end users, and an easy porting procedure
(s/^\(BuildRequires:[ \t]*\)autoconf/\1autoconf2.69-unversioned-commands/g
*.spec) to get a package to build in Mock/Koji.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
