[packman] [PM] Lame 3.98-0.pm.1 (openSUSE 11.0/x86_64)

[Pascal Bleser]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Christian Morales Vega wrote:
| 2008/7/13 Christian Morales Vega <cmorve69 at yahoo.es>:
|> With the new lame version the package has been splitted to follow
|> shared libraries packaging policy. But now "lame" package requires
|> both libmp3lame0 and libmp3lame-devel.
|>
|> I don't see how libmp3lame-devel could be needed. And
|> # readelf -d `which lame` | grep NEEDED
|>  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library:
[libncurses.so.5]
|>  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libm.so.6]
|>  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libc.so.6]
|>
|> libmp3lame0 neither is (should?).
|>
|
| Forget it, I just read the original announce...

;)

It is only needed for backwards compatibility with our spec files.
Once we've fixed them, I'll re-build lame to remove the libmp3lame-devel
dependency.

BUT... I was a bit in a hurry. Thinking of it.. it's not needed at all.
The existing packages will still work (even with a "Requires:lame", as
that will also require the shlib package), and the
Requires:libmp3lame-devel is only needed when building a package from
now on.
So we just have to think of changing
BuildRequires: lame
to
BuildRequires: libmp3lame-devel
when we build new releases from now on, when needed.

Hence, I'm going to submit a new build of lame that doesn't require the
- -devel subpackage.

cheers
- --
~  -o) Pascal Bleser     http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
~  /\\ <pascal.bleser at skynet.be>       <guru at unixtech.be>
~ _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIejM9r3NMWliFcXcRAqzxAKCcvGrslYUtwZNJ+nn9QORhdhQucgCdG0rb
sSWUVolbtmnGrIybd9siEUE=
=2heG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----