Bug 1577455

Summary:	Wrong upgrade path for ghostscript-devel
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Mattia Verga <mattia.verga>
Component:	ghostscript	Assignee:	Martin Osvald 🛹 <mosvald>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	qe-baseos-daemons
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	28	CC:	mosvald, psklenar, twaugh, yetoohappy, zdohnal
Target Milestone:	---
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:	2019-02-08 08:40:44 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 Mattia Verga 2018-05-12 06:55:51 UTC

While trying to do a system-upgrade from F27 to F28 I get:

Errore: 
 Problema: package ghostscript-devel-9.22-4.fc27.x86_64 requires ghostscript(x86-64) = 9.22-4.fc27, but none of the providers can be installed
  - ghostscript-9.22-4.fc27.x86_64 does not belong to a distupgrade repository
  - problem with installed package ghostscript-devel-9.22-4.fc27.x86_64

Looking at the specfile, I think there's an error in the Obsoletes and Conflicts statment of libgs-devel.
Accordingly to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages the Obsoletes statement should point to a higher version number than the last released one.
So it should be:
Obsoletes: ghostscript-devel <= 9.22-5

instead of
Obsoletes: ghostscript-devel < 9.22-4

In the latter case, the current F27 version, which is 9.22-4, is not properly Obsoleted.

Comment 1 Igor Gnatenko 2018-05-12 06:59:42 UTC

<= is bad idea, it should be just `< 9.22-5`

Comment 2 Mattia Verga 2018-05-12 08:49:06 UTC

(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #1)
> <= is bad idea, it should be just `< 9.22-5`

So, the example on the Packaging Guidelines is probably wrong:
'Obsoletes: foo <= 2:1.0-4   # Important: We set the Obsoletes release to 4 to be higher than the previous Release: 3%{?dist}'

Comment 3 David Kaspar // Dee'Kej 2018-05-14 10:29:39 UTC

Hey Mattia,

thanks for the report! :)


(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #1)
> <= is bad idea, it should be just `< 9.22-5`

Yeah, I don't like the '<=' either. I'll change it to 9.22-5. IMHO it should be sufficient.

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2018-05-14 10:58:12 UTC

ghostscript-9.23-3.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-39e37799a3

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2018-05-14 20:39:35 UTC

ghostscript-9.23-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-39e37799a3

Comment 6 Colin Macdonald 2018-05-17 06:38:15 UTC

*** Bug 1579117 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 David Kaspar // Dee'Kej 2018-05-17 10:37:22 UTC

The update of this is currently being blocked because of new release of libidn, which has to be released at the same time as ghostscript.

Comment 9 Martin Osvald 🛹 2019-02-08 08:40:44 UTC

Hello,

This looks to be in some kind of strange ON_QA limbo state for a very long time (~9 months) and it appears it is fixed already, therefore I am closing this as CURRENTRELEASE.

Please, feel free to reopen this bug if you still see some problems regarding this.

Thank you and regards,
-Martin