[ATrpms-users] PIL conflicts with fedora python-imaging package
john.robinson at anonymous.org.uk
Wed Dec 2 04:04:23 CET 2009
On 02/12/2009 01:24, Brian Long wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky <atrpms at kosowsky.org
> <mailto:atrpms at kosowsky.org>> wrote:
> That being the case it seems like the best solution is to either
> eliminate PIL if python-imaging has all the necessary functionality or
> alternatively make up a new python-imaging-extras package that just
> includes the files that may be missing in the Fedora version (or
> alternatively ask the Fedora maintainers to include them).
> From my limited perspective, I agree. Axel, are you opposed to this
> solution or are you just waiting for a solution to be developed (i.e. a
> new spec for python-imaging-extras)?
That all sounds wonderful, but I've a feeling atrpms' PIL really is
required for older releases, like EL4 and 5. I wonder whether the trick
might perhaps be to tweak the rpm spec so the f10+ packages can be
content with Fedora's python-imaging? I'm afraid I've little idea how to
do this myself...
More information about the atrpms-users