Re: Overeager cleaning of -devel provides

On Jul 30, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote:

> 
> 
> lib64glib2.0-devel = 1:2.36.3-2:2013.0
> 

   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> The package lacks any canonical provides with release provided, ie. it becomes impossible to add any versioned dependencies on a canonical provides with release in it.
> 

What exactly is a "canonical provide with release" if not the above?

> In the past this package had the canonical glib2-devel provides with both version & release provided for it, it would be nice if this could be added back and also if people could always leave at least one canonical provides like this in -devel packages.
> 

As long as package re-re-re-re-naming exists, then everyone
will need an advanced degree and a metric tonne of packaging
guidelines at hand to cite to simply understand what you are
talking about.

KISS is always simpler.

Increasingly package NEVRDd are a bleary toxic smog of obfuscation
for no purpose other than to carp and nit-pick.

JMHO, YMMV

73 de Jeff