Mass build failure, font sub-package issue

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 19:22 +1100, Roy Rankin wrote:
> My understanding is that the main reasons for the new requirement that 
> fonts be in a separate package were better license visibility, better 
> sharing of fonts, and to save the user from downloading stable fonts 
> just because the code changes. And in my case, as the font is in the 
> source tar ball a sub-package is indicated.
> 
> I gave the font sub-package its own version so code changes would not 
> require installing a new font package, and this "protects" the version 
> number from rpmdev-bumpspec. However, It looks like doing this is not 
> consistent with the Fedora build system.
> 
> Is there a way to achieve what I want that will work?

It looks like there is already another package that is providing
'denemo-music-fonts','4.10','1.fc11'.  There can be only one.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090225/539808ae/attachment.sig>