https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972568
--- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt(a)gmail.com> ---
The files don't belong in a package called uthash.
Instead, they should go to uthash-devel as per the
packaging guidelines.
Which would make sense. Just IMHO, and I recommend that for library-less -devel
packages so they are like all other -devel packages. However, kindly refer to
bug 798438 comment 9. The FPC finds it acceptable, if library-less development
packages (no matter whether they contain only headers or also tools) would not
be named -devel but used the base package for including their files. As such,
building just uthash.noarch from uthash.src.rpm would be okay, although enough
packagers would prefer the uthash-devel.noarch style.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=lUcIvyL7DN&a=cc_unsubscribe