```
$ rpm -e --test libdecor
error: Failed dependencies:
(libdecor-0.so.0()(64bit) if libwayland-client) is needed by
(installed) SDL2-2.26.3-1.fc38.x86_64
```
**v. 4.18.1** | Hello. The above output's formulation makes it highly uneasy to
interpret correctly, so i had to investigate to figure out whether it exits a
pertinent definition. And yet it could be found in a document linked in the RPM
official site as follows:
```
# rpm -e --test bother
removing these packages would break dependencies:
bother >= 3.1 is needed by blather-7.9-1
```
- "`Removing these packages would break dependencies`" | That current "`Failed
dependencies`" can hardly mean that. What could have been worth changing a well
descriptive, self-explicit and non-coded sentence for an obscure,
non-self-explicit and coded sentence.
- "` bother >= 3.1 is needed by (...)`" | That space "` `"
preceding "`bother >= 3.1 is needed by (...)`", and still in place in latest
version, accidentally suggests a missing value despite it appears that nothing
is missing. It brought confusion; as such it should be avoided and thus that
useless space removed.
- "`(libdecor-0.so.0()(64bit) if libwayland-client)`" | That i can hardly
interpret as a sentence making sense. What is that `if` meant to express here?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2428
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2...@github.com>
_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
