Andrey Borzenkov (arvidjaar@gmail.com) wrote:
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Adam Spiers
wrote: Marco Cimmino Gibellini (marco.cimmino@skype.net) wrote:
If openSUSE community is however not interested in a fully working out-of-the-box openSUSE rpm package then we may think to remove support for it and be happy with Fedora's RPM package which seems much easier to produce for us.
Of course we're interested :-) That's why you already got ~20 replies within 24 hours or so. But it seems your question is unusual enough
I rather consider unusual forcing two packages with identical content but different names.
Which two packages are you talking about?
that the right answer was not immediately obvious. Did you try Claudio's suggestion of
Recommend: alsa-plugins-pulse-32bit
It does not work when using rpm directly
So? Plenty of things don't work when using rpm directly.
and even with zypper users are free to use --no-recommends.
But the vast majority of users won't, so that doesn't render the use of Recommend: pointless.
You can just as well simply describe this requirement on download page.
In preference to making it work automatically in the majority of cases?
Is there any reason why 32 bit libraries cannot provide libname(32bit) just like 64 bit libraries provide libname(64bit)?
That sounds like a good idea to me. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org