Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 13:26 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 12:40 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2006-07-25 at 18:41 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >>>> Let's file it under hear-say then and move on.
> >>> No comment
> >>> c.f. below and note the output of the "echos".
> >> I think it's safe to just say this is an example of bad rpm practice.
> >> If you really want/need two different sources and versions, package
> >> them separately.
> > ... you are ignoring the fact that there exist cases where this is
> > impossible.
> Seriously, it's bad practice, don't do it. But don't mind me, go ahead
> and do it, if it's so "impossible" to do otherwise...
Check out any one tree style built GCC+newlib rpm,
Should be fine, only one
check out autogen + libopts (currently under review).
Couldn't find that one. Pointer?