Multilib extras packages need i386 libpython2.4.so on x86_64
orion at cora.nwra.com
Fri Oct 27 19:22:40 UTC 2006
Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:51:40 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
>> Alternatively, the question is "Why do these packages need
>> libpython24.so.1.0 and is that proper?"
> With BR python-devel and a file /usr/lib/k3d/libk3dpython.so.* that
> looks very much like it's a k3d plugin for Python scripting support.
Well, in my case (plplot), plplot-devel provides:
None of which require libpython2.4.so.1.0. However plplot-devel does
require plplot, which also provides:
which do require it. So in this case it seems like the thing to do
might be to move the first libraries into plplot-libs, and have
plplot-devel require that, not plplot, much like you pointed out with k3d.
So the answer to the above question may be, "No, it's not proper. Fix
your packages so the -devel packages don't require libpython2.4.so.1.0".
System Administrator 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion at cora.nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com
More information about the Fedora-maintainers