Bug 2239780
| Summary: | Virtual provide when rpm uses rpm-sequoia | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Petr Pisar <ppisar> |
| Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Michal Domonkos <mdomonko> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 42 | CC: | igor.raits, mdomonko, packaging-team-maint, pmatilai |
| 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: | 2025-03-06 09:39:00 UTC | Type: | Enhancement |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Petr Pisar
2023-09-20 07:08:35 UTC
I suppose it would also suffice to just remove the option to build without rpm-sequoia? To elaborate a bit, the non-sequoia option is what will be going away, it's just a matter of when. So while trivial to add, it also seems a bit silly to add something that'll become redundant shortly after. We might just as well remove the non-sequoia option from the spec now. Removing an option for building rpm without rpm-sequoia is also an option. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 40 development cycle. Changing version to 40. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 42 development cycle. Changing version to 42. Fixed in rpm-4.20.0-2.fc42. |