Re: [ovirt-devel] Packaging: Rationale for some split packages
Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com> writes:
Note that safeelase requires several packages which are *not*
required
for safelease, but for vdsm.
Currently vdsm is noarch rpm, so it cannot require arch specific packages.
since it requires safelease, we added arch specific packages to safelease.
Thank you for making me aware about those dependencies. The same
problem exists in Debian, I'll think how to handle it (making vdsm
package architecture specific being the obvious default choice, the
safelease hack is out question).