[packagers] Re: incompatible fftw-3-1.1 kde-redhat packaging

[Rex Dieter]

Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
>> So yes, Fedora Extras does it differently and Atrpms changed their ways
>> and I guess we'll have to change now as well, especially for RHEL...
> 
> But Dag, how can you change the package naming scheme (fftw -> fftw2 and
> fftw3 -> fftw) without breaking things for RPMforge users in a _BIG_
> way? 

An incorrect assumption.  upgrading end-user systems (fftw/ffwt3 ->
fftw2/fftw) ought to be painless, unless there exist packages with
manual/hard-coded:
Requires: fftw
that *assume* fftw = 2, in which case, those packages are broken anyway.

At most, any package that requires building that needs fftw = 2, need change
BuildRequires: fftw-devel
to
BuildRequires: fftw2-devel

> We cannot escape this limbo as long as Fedora Extras continue their
> stupidity. I say scr*w them. Rex very bluntly says it's his way or the
> hiway. Not exactly a brilliant choice, Rex, there are a helluva lot more
> people using RPMforge than Fedora Extras.

Name calling is not constructive, and only makes you look, um, well,
what's that word you used?

-- Rex