On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 21:54 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11/24/20 9:52 PM, Benjamin Berg wrote:
On Tue, 2020-11-24 at 21:26 +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11/24/20 9:10 PM, Ben Cotton wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Rename_libusb_packages_and_deprecated...
== Summary ==
Rename `libusb` to `libusb-compat` and `libusbx` to `libusb1`. Do '''not''' provide an automated update path for the old `libusb` build dependency as packages should–and likely can–be updated to use `libusb1`.
Please, don't name packages name-compat. See the guidelines on the topic: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#multiple
The upstream name of the library is "libusb-compat-0.1". So the "compat" part would not be distribution specific in this case.
In that case, I guess it is fine, thou a bit confusing. Why not call it libusb-compat-0.1?
Really, no specific reason. :)
I find it a bit weird with the version as part of the package, but it does indeed seem correct in this case.
Benjamin