[Bug 222742] Review Request: fuse-smb - FUSE-Filesystem to fast and easy access remote resources via SMB

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: fuse-smb - FUSE-Filesystem to fast and easy access remote resources via SMB


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222742





------- Additional Comments From mszpak at wp.pl  2007-01-16 17:18 EST -------
(In reply to comment #2)
(...)
>  * you're using versioned dependecies unnecesarily. Also, some of them have to 
> be removed completely.
> Have a look at fuse-smb-0.8.5-2.fc7.x86_64.rpm requires list. It requires 
> libfuse.so.2 which is owned by fuse-libs and libsmbclient.so.0 owned by samba-
> common. It means you don't need samba-common and fuse-libs dependencies. Also, 
> you can smoothly get rid of fuse dependency. You don't need versioned 
> dependency for fuse-devel as well.

At first I agree with you that few of them can smoothly removed, but let me
explain one thing.

The main reason why I use (sometimes redundant) full packages name is the fact
that those packages are also (till now only) avilable as a separate packages
from my website. When I download some stand-alone package and try to install it
it's much more readable to see "fuse-lib > 2.3 is required by ..." than
"libfuse.so.2()(64bit) is required by ...". In the first option I know what
should I install, in the second I have to find it out first [1]. 

[1] - I know that novadays (in FC4+ out-of-box?) it's possible to use yum to
resolve dependencies and install required packages.

The only problem I see is the situation when package was renamed in a newer
version, but SPEC file should be then updated.

Do you really think that using full package names in the Requirement section
instead of letting RPM do it, can cause some problems or is an out-of-date habit?


(In reply to comment #3)
> Setting CFLAGS here is superfluous

True.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.