No lzma sdk in fedora

[John Reiser]

On 02/12/2010 03:11 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

>  What I was really asking is if there should
> be a source package so that upx could be built without having a second
> copy of the SDK in another srpm?

The previous editions lzma442, 443, 449, 457, 458, 459,
all required *different* adaptations by upx.
So a separate Fedora source package would have been of little value,
except possibly as an indicator of the need for a -libs package.
But during that time, creating a -libs package appeared to be
incompatible with the licensing.  [Today "LZMA SDK is placed in
the public domain".]

Until someone with enough authority standardizes the library package
and its interfaces, and there is evidence that the library will be
maintained, then each downstream must fend for itself.

--