1. "because upstream produces them". Basically, packages should not get stunted at the distro level just because you don't like the bike shed's color. Someone may grow a dependency later and then would be very upset if kbd-devel didn't behave the same as the upstream variant.
2. Examination of the git log suggest the author is a serious automake user, and that makes it all the more likely we will be seeing independent bumps; in other words, libkbdfile.so.1 should be separate from libkeymap1.rpm.

Stanislav Brabec (sbrabec) - 6 days ago

author source maintainer

libkbdfile1 is a private shared library. It does not have any includes, so it cannot be linked to a third party project. That is why I decided to not pack it separately.

(Well, I did not check that it is called from libkeymapfile1 or from the kbd itself. In the first case, the current layout makes sense. In the second case, it would be better to make it a part of kbd package itself.)

---

Jan Engelhardt (jengelh) - 5 days ago

reviewer

It's not private, there exists a /usr/include/kbdfile.h.

---

Stanislav Brabec (sbrabec) - 3 days ago

author source maintainer

Ah, I overseen it.

rq 1216987