Bug 1469136
| Summary: | Requires not handed correctly? | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Ralf Corsepius <rc040203> |
| Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 26 | CC: | ffesti, ignatenko, kardos.lubos, mjw, packaging-team-maint, pmatilai, rc040203, vmukhame |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-07-10 15:07:52 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Ralf Corsepius
2017-07-10 13:04:55 UTC
dnf check? This behaviour is probably correct. Perl has Requires(post): perl-macros This means that perl-macro is only needed during installation and can be removed afterwards. (In reply to Florian Festi from comment #2) > This behaviour is probably correct. Perl has > > Requires(post): perl-macros > > This means that perl-macro is only needed during installation and can be > removed afterwards. Thanks Florian for looking into it ;) (In reply to Florian Festi from comment #2) > This behaviour is probably correct. I disagree -> Reopening # rpm -q --requires perl still returns "perl-macros" This means "rpm -q --requires" has been rendered pretty much useless and non-helpful => REGRESSION. > Perl has > > Requires(post): perl-macros That's something I do not understand. It seem complete meaningless to me. I am inclined to consider this to be a packaging bug. > This means that perl-macro is only needed during installation and can be > removed afterwards. I don't understand this. For this being a regression there has to be a change in behaviour. Can you please point out between which versions of rpm the behaviour changed? The fact that you do not understand something is not a bug in rpm. Please open a bug against the proper component. The same applies to the possible packaging issue in the perl package. PS: You might want to try rpm -qv --requires (In reply to Florian Festi from comment #5) > For this being a regression there has to be a change in behaviour. Can you > please point out between which versions of rpm the behaviour changed? I am sure, you understand the "friendlyness" you are communicating here :( You are right insofar, as this bug is present in all Fedoras I have access to (back to f23). This of course don't mean much because are using rpm-4.13.x. > The fact that you do not understand something is not a bug in rpm. Well, I do not understand rpm's behavior and perl's packaging. I.e, I consider a) rpm's way of handling "requires(post)" not to make any sense b) perl.spec carrying Requires(post) to a packaging mistake. I.e. I assume a packaging bug in perl.spec is triggering a bug in rpm/dnf. This is expected behavior, unchanged all the way since rpm 4.0.1 (that'd be sometime during 2001, yes that old) where the fine-grained Requires(pre/post/etc) dependencies were originally introduced. See https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/master/doc/manual/tsort for the original rationale. Bottom line, it's a packaging bug, and not an entirely uncommon one at that. "Requires(post): foo" states that the package requires "foo" to be present during execution of %post scriptlet. Nothing more, nothing less. If the package also requires "foo" for it's normal operation then there should be an additional "Requires: foo" for that. FWIW there's actually an RFE to make dnf take advantage of the fine-grained dependencies as they are implemented, see bug 1381332. |