[Fedora-packaging] [Draft][RFC] The use of alternatives

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at gmail.com
Sun Feb 22 18:52:32 UTC 2009

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Hi all,
> Here's a draft that - after deciding which solution is best - should
> eventually be put into Packaging Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsingAlternatives
> I tried to list all pros and cons of each solution.
> I'm personally hesitating between using %ghost or Provides:, but I'd
> prefer the Provides: solution.
If the only con of the %ghost solution is that it conflicts with "files
owned by multiple packages are forbidden" I would prefer that.  This is
similar to the current exception to allow multiple packages to own the
same directory when they are not in a hierarchical relationship.  We
would need to note this reasoning (or link to this) on the Conflicts page.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20090222/0badc477/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list