Proposal to (formally/easily) allowing multiple versions of the same library installable

William Cohen wcohen at
Fri Feb 13 18:56:57 UTC 2015

On 02/13/2015 12:15 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
>> 2. No reviews are required for new libfooX packages (as it is not
>> required right now when you update your libfoo package
> I disagree with this point, reviews are important, arguably *more* important 
> in special cases like parallel-installable libraries.
>> For -devel packages, two methods can be allowed:
>> 1. Simple: -devel packages conflict with each other, so while you can
>> have multiple versions of libfoo installed, you can have only a single
>> version of libfoo-devel installed
>> 2. Flexible: Provide the possibility of installing multiple -devel
>> versions, and a method to select the "default" one, like the
>> alternatives system.
> +1 for option 2, option 1 is bad, there be dragons.

Option 1 is not viable.  On a machine that has multiple developers using it what happens when developer A needs devel rpm version X while developer B needs devel version Y? They have to take turns?  Also people doing development on the machine might not be system admins.  Asking a system admin to keep installing (and uninstalling) devel packages is not going to work.

> Though there are many opportunities for bikeshedding, the rest of your 
> proposal seems reasonable.
> -- Rex

More information about the devel mailing list