https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2360119 --- Comment #28 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- > rpm is a bit picky where it allows %description being placed. The order of things you have now is even weirder than what was there before :D But whatever works for you ... (The *only* thing you need to be careful about with %description is that there are no Tags after it, because they would be subsumed into the description text, so RPM isn't "picky", it just needs to known how to parse the .spec file.) > As defined by rust. 'library' is lib.rs and everything included by it. > 'module' is one 'pub mod $name;'. Specifically the efifile.rs module > uses udev, the other modules in the library do not. It doesn't make sense to distinguish between modules. There is only one unit for compilation and linking - and that's *the whole crate*. "Modules" only exist on the source code level / file system, but they are *not* separate compilation units. So if the *crate* links a library, *all* targets from that crate link it, there is no granularity here (how would cargo even know?). If an executable target *shouldn't* link with a library (because it doesn't need it), it needs to be moved to a separate crate that doesn't have this dependency. === I am just confused by the "alternatives" stuff you added in the most recent version of the package. Is using alternatives really necessary? They're an old and creaky system that doesn't even work on Atomic systems. It also doesn't look as if it confirms to the guidelines here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Alternatives/ Do these two packages really need to be parallel-installable with runtime selection between the two? Or would making uefi-boot-rs available as ... uefi-boot-rs be enough? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2360119 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202360119%23c28 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
