Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: gxine - GTK frontend for the xine multimedia library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222326 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-18 04:37 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > /me votes for "%{_libdir}/mozilla/plugins" as that scheme is used by other > > packages already This doesn't work do to bugs in rpm (Ville: Does this still apply, or this rpm finally been fixed). > Well, I will think about it. But about the spin you talk about - you can have > gxine without firefox installed. The "Require: firefox" is in the -mozplugin > subpackage. The problem is not firefox, the problem is removing "%{_libdir}/mozilla/plugins" the directory, when it's not needed anymore. That is what I wrote a couple of days ago in another package's review: - If several packages share a common directory, and if they depend on each other in a strict hierarchy, then letting the "root package" own this dir is sufficient. - If they don't depend on each other in a strict hierarchy, all of the packages must own this directory. The former doesn't apply to gxine-mozplug => Only the latter is applicable. "Requires: firefox" would be a hack to force the former approach, though this, strictly speaking is incorrect and too strict (It's the same "hack" why packages providing *.pc must "Require: pkgconfig" and packages providing aclocal/*.m4 must "Require: automake". Both these "Require"-ments are hacks/band-aids and actually wrong, but provided rpm persists to be unfixed/unmaintained, these are "easy hacks"). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
