[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: fftw advice...

On Tuesday 10 July 2007 14:17:46 Rex Dieter wrote:
> I was going to get to work on building fftw2/fftw3 for epel, and have a
> small quandry.
> Fedora names these fftw2/fftw.
> rpmforge currently names them fftw/fftw3.  They feel strongly about it, and
> users were angered previously at my initial attempts at implementing an
> Obsoletes/Provides migration path to fftw2/fftw.

  What is so special about fftw to name the version that is not further 
developed as fftw as opposed to the version that is developed? Don't we trust 
upstream to decide which is the package's name?

  OTHO version 2 and 3 are different libraries (different API) that target 
more or less the same problem space, so there is not such a thing as an 
upgrade path in this case. If they had different names then there would not 
be such a problem. :-)

> -- Rex

José Abílio

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]