headers
Richard Hughes | 6 Oct 11:27

Obsoletes question: codeina

In the PackageKit-gstreamer-plugins package, I've currently got:

Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1
Provides:  codeina = 0.10.1

The version in rawhide is codeina-0.10.1-9.fc10

Looking at bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465723 it
looks like I've got this wrong.

Should I just do:

Obsoletes: codeina
Provides:  codeina

Thanks,

Richard.

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Paul Howarth | 6 Oct 11:49
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

Richard Hughes wrote:
> In the PackageKit-gstreamer-plugins package, I've currently got:
> 
> Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1
> Provides:  codeina = 0.10.1
> 
> The version in rawhide is codeina-0.10.1-9.fc10
> 
> Looking at bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465723 it
> looks like I've got this wrong.
> 
> Should I just do:
> 
> Obsoletes: codeina
> Provides:  codeina

Unversioned obsoletes are bad and should be avoided like the plague.

How about this?

Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1-10
Provides:  codeina = 0.10.1-10

Paul.

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Richard Hughes | 6 Oct 12:19

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 10:49 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
> How about this?
> 
> Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1-10
> Provides:  codeina = 0.10.1-10

Yup, I'll do this, thanks.

Richard.

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Matej Cepl | 8 Oct 11:01
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On 2008-10-06, 10:19 GMT, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-10-06 at 10:49 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> How about this?
>> 
>> Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1-10
>> Provides:  codeina = 0.10.1-10
>
> Yup, I'll do this, thanks.

Or probably even better is:

Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1-10
Provides:  codeina = %{version}-%{release}

Or maybe not, you have to decide whether the codeina name has any 
meaning aside from being the older package (like for example 
gecko-libs even aside from xulrunner).

Matěj

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ville Skyttä | 8 Oct 18:49
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Matej Cepl wrote:

> Obsoletes: codeina < 0.10.1-10
> Provides:  codeina = %{version}-%{release}
>
> Or maybe not, you have to decide whether the codeina name has any
> meaning aside from being the older package (like for example
> gecko-libs even aside from xulrunner).

Is the Provides: above appropriate in the first place, or should only the 
Obsoletes: be there?  The only thing PackageKit-gstreamer-plugin and codeina 
appear to have in common is /usr/libexec/gst-install-plugins-helper.

More info:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jesse Keating | 8 Oct 19:01
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 19:49 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> Is the Provides: above appropriate in the first place, or should only the 
> Obsoletes: be there?  The only thing PackageKit-gstreamer-plugin and codeina 
> appear to have in common is /usr/libexec/gst-install-plugins-helper.
> 
> More info:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages

In this case, people who currently have codeina installed, but not the
pk-gstreamer-plugin, would get pk-gstreamer-plugin as an upgrade to
their installed codeina.  They wouldn't get pk-plugin automatically any
other way, unless something else they have installed requires it.  It's
somewhat fuzzy use of Provides, but it is in a way that is favorable to
our users.  Note that the provides is only on the package name, not on
any files or libraries, so if you had something that depended on codeina
files or libraries this wouldn't satisfy it.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ville Skyttä | 8 Oct 19:16
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 19:49 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > Is the Provides: above appropriate in the first place, or should only the
> > Obsoletes: be there?  The only thing PackageKit-gstreamer-plugin and
> > codeina appear to have in common is
> > /usr/libexec/gst-install-plugins-helper.
> >
> > More info:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Frepla
> >cing_existing_packages
>
> In this case, people who currently have codeina installed, but not the
> pk-gstreamer-plugin, would get pk-gstreamer-plugin as an upgrade to
> their installed codeina.  They wouldn't get pk-plugin automatically any
> other way, unless something else they have installed requires it.  It's
> somewhat fuzzy use of Provides, but it is in a way that is favorable to
> our users.

I think the Obsoletes alone accomplishes auto-upgrading from codeina to 
pk-gstreamer-plugin.   I hope that's what you meant as desirable in the 
above, I'm having a bit of a problem parsing it.

Dropping the Provides would mean that if something had a depdendency on 
codeina, that dep would be broken, and that pk-gstreamer-plugin couldn't be 
installed with "yum install codeina".  I don't think it'd have any effect on 
whether pk-gstreamer-plugin would/wouldn't be applied as an upgrade over 
installed codeina e.g. by yum (assuming the Obsoletes is left there).

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jesse Keating | 8 Oct 19:19
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 20:16 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> I think the Obsoletes alone accomplishes auto-upgrading from codeina to 
> pk-gstreamer-plugin.   I hope that's what you meant as desirable in the 
> above, I'm having a bit of a problem parsing it.

With an obsolete alone, 'yum update' would never see that it needs to
bring in pk-gstreamer-plugin.  Codeina would be left alone.  IMHO that's
not the scenario we want played out.  We /want/ Codeina replaced by the
packagekit solution, and the only way to make that happen for people
already with codeina installed is to add the Provides.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Ville Skyttä | 8 Oct 19:39
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wednesday 08 October 2008, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 20:16 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > I think the Obsoletes alone accomplishes auto-upgrading from codeina to
> > pk-gstreamer-plugin.   I hope that's what you meant as desirable in the
> > above, I'm having a bit of a problem parsing it.
>
> With an obsolete alone, 'yum update' would never see that it needs to
> bring in pk-gstreamer-plugin.  Codeina would be left alone.

That's not how any depsolver I'm aware of behaves - I think it'd be a bug.

> IMHO that's 
> not the scenario we want played out.  We /want/ Codeina replaced by the
> packagekit solution, and the only way to make that happen for people
> already with codeina installed is to add the Provides.

As said, the Obsoletes should be enough for that.  And is for me (on F-9):

----

# rpm -q codeina
codeina-0.10.1-8.fc9.noarch

# cat <<EOF > /etc/yum.repos.d/tmp2.repo
[tmp2]
name=tmp2
gpgcheck=0
baseurl=http://scop.fedorapeople.org/tmp2/
EOF
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply |
headers
James Antill | 8 Oct 19:43
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 10:19 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 20:16 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > I think the Obsoletes alone accomplishes auto-upgrading from codeina to 
> > pk-gstreamer-plugin.   I hope that's what you meant as desirable in the 
> > above, I'm having a bit of a problem parsing it.
> 
> With an obsolete alone, 'yum update' would never see that it needs to
> bring in pk-gstreamer-plugin.

 That's not true, obsoletes alone would be enough for "yum update". As
Ville says, the Provides is needed if anything has a "Requires:
codina" ... but that shouldn't be true, in Fedora.

-- 
James Antill <james <at> fedoraproject.org>
Fedora

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Jesse Keating | 8 Oct 19:48
Favicon

Re: Obsoletes question: codeina

On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 13:43 -0400, James Antill wrote:
> 
>  That's not true, obsoletes alone would be enough for "yum update". As
> Ville says, the Provides is needed if anything has a "Requires:
> codina" ... but that shouldn't be true, in Fedora.

I stand corrected.  Don't know what was giving me the previous
assumption.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

--

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list <at> redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane