Bug 496171
Summary: | brasero-nautilus should Obsolete (and provide) nautilus-cd-burner | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jesse Keating <jkeating> |
Component: | brasero | Assignee: | Denis Leroy <denis> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | bnocera, dcantrell, denis, mclasen, tcallawa |
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: | 2009-04-23 22:50:59 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: | 446452 |
Description
Jesse Keating
2009-04-16 23:19:42 UTC
Normally even if nautilus-cd-burner is installed, the brasero stack should be used (IF brasero-nautilus is installed). In the end it comes down to what is being installed by default. If somebody is using nautilus-cd-burner from F-10 and doing an upgrade to F-11, they will keep using nautilus-cd-burner since brasero-nautilus won't get install auto-magically. While a fresh F-11 install, from the live CD for example, will install the brasero stack but not nautilus-cd-burner. Isn't this what we want ? If we make brasero Require brasero-nautilus and obsolete nautilus-cd-burner, we might as well orphan nautilus-cd-burner altogether and remove it from the repo... -denis I thought we wanted to do away with nautilus-cd-burner, and move folks to Brasero. Is there any reason to keep the old stack around? > Is there any reason to keep the old stack around?
Maybe as a workaround for a brasero bug ?
Matthias, what's your opinion ?
I think obsoleting n-c-b is the right thing to do. Okay, so let's add to brasero-nautilus: Obsoletes: nautilus-cd-burner < 2.26.0 Provides: nautilus-cd-burner = %{version} I assume the Provides: line is required to ensure a user upgrading from F-10 gets brasero-nautilus installed to replace nautilus-cd-burner, right ? Since this is in essence replacing nautilus-cd-burner, you should follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages Denis, did you file a ticket to get this tagged for F11 ? Denis, can you also take care of these: Broken deps for x86_64 ---------------------------------------------------------- gnome-desktop-sharp-2.26.0-1.fc11.x86_64 requires libnautilus-burn.so.4()(64bit) gnome-python2-nautilus-cd-burner-2.26.0-1.fc11.x86_64 requires libnautilus-burn.so.4()(64bit) ? Sure. I assume those need to be tagged for f11 as well. Okay, there's an issue here. There are 2 leaf packages that depend on nautilus-cd-burner-libs through gnome-python2-nautilus-cd-burner :
> repoquery -q --whatrequires gnome-python2-nautilus-cd-burner
pybackpack-0:0.5.6-3.fc11.noarch
serpentine-0:0.9-4.fc11.noarch
Orphaning both seems extreme to me, but we could only "orphan" brasero-cd-nautilus and keep brasero-cd-nautilus-{libs|devel} around. I can confirm that would be enough to compile gnome-python2-nautilus-cd-burner (with a tiny Require fix to the spec file).
You lost me there. brasero-cd-nautilus == nautilus-cd-burner ? Anyway, sorry if that wasn't clear. I think can obsolete nautius-cd-burner, but we need to keep nautilus-cd-burner-libs around. Bastien, is that correct ? Yikes, yes s/brasero/nautilus/ in that last paragraph, was 1:30 am when I wrote that... (In reply to comment #13) > You lost me there. brasero-cd-nautilus == nautilus-cd-burner ? > > Anyway, sorry if that wasn't clear. I think can obsolete nautius-cd-burner, but > we need to keep nautilus-cd-burner-libs around. Bastien, is that correct ? Yes, the people writing front-ends to nautilus-cd-burner didn't get a chance to port their apps yet. So we need to un-orphan nautilus-cd-burner, and only package nautilus-cd-burner-libs and nautilus-cd-burner-devel. Brasero obsoletes and Provides 'nautilus-cd-burner', so brasero doesn't have to be rebuilt. Matthias, are you taking care of the this ? No, I'm not. I was expecting you to do it. For the 'only package' part, I think it is sufficient to just remove the main %file section. > I think it is sufficient to just remove the main %file section
Well I'm not sure that wuold work. If I'm not mistaken, it's not possible to have a spec named 'foo' to only generate 'foo-X' but not 'foo' itself... We'd have to rename the package altogether.
Jesse is it possible to "block" nautilus-cd-burner, while allowing its 2 subpackages (nautilus-cd-burner-libs and nautilus-cd-burner-devel) to live on ?
(In reply to comment #18) > > I think it is sufficient to just remove the main %file section > > Well I'm not sure that wuold work. If I'm not mistaken, it's not possible to > have a spec named 'foo' to only generate 'foo-X' but not 'foo' itself... We'd > have to rename the package altogether. See xorg-x11-drivers > > Jesse is it possible to "block" nautilus-cd-burner, while allowing its 2 > subpackages (nautilus-cd-burner-libs and nautilus-cd-burner-devel) to live on ? no. Well xorg-x11-drivers still generates an 'xorg-x11-drivers' RPM, albeit an empty one. So you're suggesting stripping the installed content so that 'nautilus-cd-burner' becomes an empty RPM ? (while keeping the 2 subpackages intact) Is that really necessary actually ? After all, brasero-nautilus Provides a higher version of nautilus-cd-burner. So even if we build it here, it can't be installed from yum... So we wouldn't even have to rebuild it, just have rel-eng unblock it. does that make sense ? If you don't have a %files, it won't make a package for it. Wrote: /home/spot/cvs/sandbox/nautilus-cd-burner/F-11/nautilus-cd-burner-2.25.3-7.fc11.src.rpm Wrote: /home/spot/cvs/sandbox/nautilus-cd-burner/F-11/x86_64/nautilus-cd-burner-devel-2.25.3-7.fc11.x86_64.rpm Wrote: /home/spot/cvs/sandbox/nautilus-cd-burner/F-11/x86_64/nautilus-cd-burner-libs-2.25.3-7.fc11.x86_64.rpm Wrote: /home/spot/cvs/sandbox/nautilus-cd-burner/F-11/x86_64/nautilus-cd-burner-debuginfo-2.25.3-7.fc11.x86_64.rpm I'm going to unblock and commit a working (libs and devel only) version now. Ok, thanks spot All done. nautilus-cd-burner-2.25.3-7.fc11 is tagged into dist-f11. |