Bug 443459

Summary: RFE: process explicit deps. before implicit ones to try to reduce pulling in extra deps.
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Bastien Nocera <bnocera>
Component: yumAssignee: Seth Vidal <skvidal>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 9CC: ffesti, james.antill, katzj, notting, pmatilai, tim.lauridsen, tjb
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: 2008-10-24 20:11:13 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 438944    
Attachments:
Description Flags
yum-totem.txt none

Description Bastien Nocera 2008-04-21 17:35:49 UTC 
yum-3.2.14-10.fc9.noarch

Doing a "yum install totem" should be dragging in totem-gstreamer, not _both_
totem-gstreamer and totem-xine.

The main totem package has a requires on "totem-gstreamer", but the
libbaconvideowidget.so.0 dependency will resolve to totem-xine (because of the
shorter name?), so both packages will be installed.
Comment 1 Bastien Nocera 2008-04-21 17:35:49 UTC 
Created attachment 303180 [details]
yum-totem.txt
Comment 2 James Antill 2008-04-21 17:43:26 UTC 
 Yeh, one of the things we are thinking of doing, after Fed-9 is out, is
processing all the explicit dependencies first ... which should solve a couple
of the problems like this.
 Until something like that goes in though, it's going to stay as is.
Comment 3 Thomas J. Baker 2008-04-29 13:57:53 UTC 
Too bad as it makes it seem like totem is completely busted. I couldn't figure
out why totem wouldn't play much of anything even though I had the other
gstreamer-based apps working fine. Turns out totem-xine was installed and was
mucking up the works. This on two systems from preview installs. I don't imagine
this could be fixed in the comps as the dependency would still be pulled in?
Comment 4 Bug Zapper 2008-05-14 09:52:30 UTC 
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA.
More information and reason for this action is here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Comment 5 James Antill 2008-08-07 18:50:50 UTC 
This is also releated to: bug 442626
Comment 6 James Antill 2008-08-09 19:25:26 UTC 
 A commit I just did today orders requires which I'm pretty sure will solve the above.
 upstream commit 92f360344742fa3fca38d97846cb7a31f3dd88bf
Comment 7 Bill Nottingham 2008-10-24 20:11:13 UTC 
Verified.