On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:39:57AM +0300, Michael Shigorin wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 07:20:10PM +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> > > exfat-utils-1.0.1-1.x86_64.rpm
> > > fuse-exfat-1.0.1-3.x86_64.rpm
> > At most S: fuse-exfat in fuse-exfat...
>
> S: fuse
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 07:20:10PM +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
> > exfat-utils-1.0.1-1.x86_64.rpm
> > fuse-exfat-1.0.1-3.x86_64.rpm
> At most S: fuse-exfat in fuse-exfat...
S: fuse-exfat in exfat-utils?
--
WBR, Michael Shigorin / http://altlinux.org
-- http://opennet.r
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 07:55:55PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> there are two packages on ftp:
>
> exfat-utils-1.0.1-1.x86_64.rpm
> fuse-exfat-1.0.1-3.x86_64.rpm
>
> any ideas why the split?
Upstream decided to split them.
> as i have to install both to use exfat moun
there are two packages on ftp:
exfat-utils-1.0.1-1.x86_64.rpm
fuse-exfat-1.0.1-3.x86_64.rpm
any ideas why the split? as i have to install both to use exfat mounts
properly...
there's even no suggests to suggest the other package, should it be
added? to which one of them?
http://gi