Bug 118780

Summary:	Requires(pre,postun) is ignored for installed packages
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael>
Component:	rpm	Assignee:	Paul Nasrat <nobody+pnasrat>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Mike McLean <mikem>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	leonard-rh-bugzilla, mharris, rdieter, redhat-bugzilla, rh-bugzilla
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-04-23 00:10:53 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Michael Schwendt 2004-03-20 06:17:13 UTC

Installed is a package which "Requires(pre,postun): foo". 

$ rpm -qR test | grep foo
foo

However:

$ rpm -q --whatrequires foo
no package requires foo

And I can "rpm -e foo" and the %postun scriptlet in the installed
package fails. Like in Enrico's bug 118773 report, splitting the
requirements to

Requires(pre): foo
Requires(post): foo

fixes this, and "foo" shows up in upon "--whatrequires foo" query, too.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.3-0.21 (and rpm-4.2.1-0.30)

How reproducible:
Always

Additional info:
I'm prepared to hear this is a feature, not a bug. ;)

Comment 1 Jeff Johnson 2004-03-20 15:39:00 UTC

Ok, it's a "feature" not a bug.

You have known and adequate workaround. I suggest you use that.

Comment 2 Leonard den Ottolander 2004-04-13 14:08:15 UTC

*** Bug 118773 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Mike A. Harris 2005-04-22 13:13:10 UTC

This is not a feature.  It is a bug.  RPM documentation clearly states
that the syntax:  Requires(foo,bar) is valid.  Fix rpm.

Comment 4 Warren Togami 2005-04-22 22:19:06 UTC

*boink*

Comment 5 Leonard den Ottolander 2005-04-22 22:30:03 UTC

??

Comment 6 Paul Nasrat 2005-04-23 00:09:14 UTC

See bug #155700 which I'll close as a dupe of this for details of issue.  I've
tested a fix - basically a test that is incorrect in (pre,postun) cases and I'll
get a testing package out next week.

Comment 7 Paul Nasrat 2005-04-23 00:10:53 UTC

Sorry easier closing this way around - as other bug is on blockers.  

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 155700 ***