Bug 428368 (fedora-ds)
Summary: | Review Request: fedora-ds: Meta-package for Fedora Directory Server Suite | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rich Megginson <rmeggins> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Dennis Gilmore <dennis> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dennis, fedora-package-review, notting, orion |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | dennis:
fedora-review+
dennis: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-04-03 18:42:16 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
Rich Megginson
2008-01-11 04:17:57 UTC
ill take this looks good and is clean approved. builds in mock. Updated due to rename of fedora-admin-console to fedora-ds-admin-console SRPM: http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/fedora-ds-1.1.1-2.src.rpm Spec: http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/fedora-ds.spec New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: fedora-ds Short Description: Meta-package for Fedora Directory Server Suite Owners: rmeggins nkinder nhosoi Branches: F-8 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: CVS Done Um, this should be a noarch package: BuildArch: noarch (In reply to comment #6) > Um, this should be a noarch package: > > BuildArch: noarch > Unfortunately, I don't think it can be a noarch package, because most of its dependencies are arch specific packages (fedora-ds-base, fedora-ds-admin). How would that work? (In reply to comment #7) > Unfortunately, I don't think it can be a noarch package, because most of its > dependencies are arch specific packages (fedora-ds-base, fedora-ds-admin). How > would that work? We don't care about the architecture of dependencies. (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > > Unfortunately, I don't think it can be a noarch package, because most of its > > dependencies are arch specific packages (fedora-ds-base, fedora-ds-admin). How > > would that work? > > We don't care about the architecture of dependencies. So if I do yum install fedora-ds on an x86_64 system, what happens? Does it pull in fedora-ds-base.x86_64 or fedora-ds-base.i386? If the latter, and I really want (and expect since I'm running on an x86_64 system) to get fedora-ds-base.x86_64 picked up as a dependency, how does that work? Well, under the current setup, you would get both, with the x86_64 binaries taking precedence. Looks like current plan is to fix yum so that you would only get the preferred architecture. Why is fedora-ds-base multilib at the moment anyway? Is there any reason why you would want to run the 32-bit version on x86_64? (In reply to comment #10) > Well, under the current setup, you would get both, with the x86_64 binaries > taking precedence. Looks like current plan is to fix yum so that you would only > get the preferred architecture. Ok. I guess at that point I can then make fedora-ds noarch? > Why is fedora-ds-base multilib at the moment anyway? Is there any reason why > you would want to run the 32-bit version on x86_64? Is it multilib? What makes it multilib? I don't think there is any reason to run the 32-bit version on x86_64. comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > Well, under the current setup, you would get both, with the x86_64 binaries > > taking precedence. Looks like current plan is to fix yum so that you would only > > get the preferred architecture. > > Ok. I guess at that point I can then make fedora-ds noarch? You could make it noarch now. > > Why is fedora-ds-base multilib at the moment anyway? Is there any reason why > > you would want to run the 32-bit version on x86_64? > > Is it multilib? What makes it multilib? I don't think there is any reason to > run the 32-bit version on x86_64. fedora-ds-base is multilib because it has a -devel sub-package. I believe you can black list it by sending a request to rel-eng.(In reply to I'd like to see, and would be willing to maintain, EL-5 branches for fedora-ds and company in EPEL. Thoughts? |