https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174408
--- Comment #2 from Šimon Lukašík <sluka...@redhat.com> ---
First couple of ideas:
- There is no documentation for each plug-in. It is not the must for me, but
it would be great to have a few words about each plug-in.
- name of library: libbd, I am afraid to use libbd as library name. Light
search on web for libdb gives some results. What do you think about possible
collisions?
- package name is libblockdev
- lib name is bd.
- header files are in blockdev directory
I am not sure what can break if those are not consistent.
- Quoting the Fedora guidelines:
In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa}
- requires from libblockdev-plugins-all should imho also put the fully
versioned dependency in. What if I want to install libblockdev-plugins-all.i686
on my box?
- spell-check says that metapackage is not word, 'meta-package' will do it.
What are your thoughts, Vraťo?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
