Bug 425816
Summary: | libdvdnav-devel Requires: | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Florian La Roche <laroche> |
Component: | libdvdnav | Assignee: | Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | rawhide | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-01-16 13:02:38 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
Florian La Roche
2007-12-16 08:23:29 UTC
Hello Dominik, any word on this? Should the old lib be remove to kept around for some longer time? regards, Florian La Roche (In reply to comment #0) > Description of problem: > > libdvdread-devel is now a subrpm of libdvdnav. Please remove the > "Requires: libdvdread-devel" from the spec file and make sure that > the libdvdread library is used from the source rpm at link time. No. libdvdnav-devel does require libdvdread-devel. I will add %{version}-%{release} requirement instead. Currently there are two binary rpms in the tree due to two different src.rpms producing the same package names: [laroche@dudweiler Packages]$ pwd /home/mirror/fedora/development/i386/os/Packages [laroche@dudweiler Packages]$ ls libdvdread-* libdvdread-0.9.7-3.fc8.i386.rpm libdvdread-devel-0.9.7-3.fc8.i386.rpm libdvdread-4.1.1-3.fc9.i386.rpm libdvdread-devel-4.1.1-3.fc9.i386.rpm [laroche@dudweiler Packages]$ Do these overlap and one should be removed or should rpm package names to moved to a new name? Thanks a lot, Florian La Roche Looking at this again, the above report was not about the duplicate rpms, but about the src.rpm depending on one of its su-rpms instead of compiling against itself. regards, Florian la Roche If you look at the specfile you'll see that it doesn't have BuildRequires: libdvdread-devel. It does compile against itself. In your original report, you mentioned Requires: of the libdvdnav-devel package, not its BuildRequires:. And yes, the older RPMs may be removed. Looks all good, so closing this bz now. Thanks a lot, Florian La Roche |