https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474033
--- Comment #20 from Michal Schmidt <mschmidt(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Andrey Maslennikov from comment #18)
Supporting several specs is more complicated especially taking into
account
that the diff will be in 1-2 lines only.
So I'd like to keep it this way, the line is required. It was proved by some
fails in our build env :)
Of course if the build test was performed on a system with RPM < 4.6, then
without explicit BuildRoot and Group tags it would fail. It's just that usually
in Fedora spec files we do not care about such systems.
I'm not going to block the review for this, so keep the tags if you want them.
Will add a comment. In fact, static libs are simply required to
develop with
UCX.
Do you mean it is impossible to develop with dynamic libraries? Where is the
problem?
I am looking at the contents of the ucx and ucx-devel binary packages. The
contents of the /usr/share/ucx directory look like documentation to me. Would
you consider moving those files under /usr/share/doc/ucx? (That would be an
upstream change, not just a packaging change.)
--
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