https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187910 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187910#c5 Egbert Eich <eich@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |IN_PROGRESS --- Comment #5 from Egbert Eich <eich@suse.com> --- (In reply to Peter Hill from comment #4)

...

I will see what I can do without getting complained at by rpmlint for not adhering to some packaging guideline. At least I will make the packages containing these tools prerequisites of the -devel packages.

Thanks, that would be useful!

I've fixed this for netcdf-fortran and netcdf-cxx4 now. In both cases, *-config has been moved to the devel package. This way, I was able to get rid of two binary packages. Unfortunately, these won't be available until the netcdf build is fixed - which is most likely a fallout of the gcc update. If there isn't a fix upstream, yet, it may take a while for me to get to it.

...

The non-environment module versions were there before I started creating the variant using environment modules so I kept them around. After all, I did not want to disfranchise existing users. There was no netcdf-fortran package when I started it. Having both variants makes the spec file even more complex and I did not need non-environment module versions as this is usually not what one wants to use in an HPC environment. Now, with containers, this may change. On the other hand, I'm not sure if it is a good idea to go thru packages for building these.

Personally, I use these packages in a non-HPC environment, and having the non-module versions is definitely nice. It would help things feel more consistent at least.

Well, this is a community project, if someone would make a submission I'd review it and if it's ok I'd accept it. But packaging is not my favorite pasttime and I don't need these for my work either ... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.