On 03. 03. 21 13:47, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:33 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@redhat.com
> <mailto:mhroncok@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 03. 03. 21 12:49, Ondrej Dubaj wrote:
> > Compat package prepared.
> >
> > Package autoconf269-2.69-1 provides:
> >
> > /usr/bin/autoconf269
> > /usr/bin/autoheader269
> > /usr/bin/autom4te269
> > /usr/bin/autoreconf269
> > /usr/bin/autoscan269
> > /usr/bin/autoupdate269
> > /usr/bin/ifnames269
> > ...
> >
> > Parallel installation successful.
> >
> > Any suggestions/concerns are welcome.
>
> My concerns are:
>
> 1) Why 269 and not 2.69?
>
> Just a naming convention, if needed can be easily changed
There is no need to complicate stuff by removing the dot. The naming convention
for compat packages is to include the version:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple
Ok, will change immediately.
> 2) Is the parallel installability worth the trouble of different names?
>
> It is up to us to discuss this.
How are most of the packages in Fedora using? Is it spelling out "autoconf" in
the spec file, or trough some configure scripts? If it is the second, I worry
that a command will mean patching (or sedding) would be required.
Both, actually.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok