| Summary: | major problems with rawhide package | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Alex Lancaster <alex> |
| Component: | mathgl | Assignee: | D Haley <mycae> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 19 | CC: | kryzhev, mycae, susi.lehtola |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-01-15 10:36:19 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Alex Lancaster
2011-03-01 21:16:13 UTC
(In reply to comment #0) > 2. removing the octave package as done here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages > > for details on how to do this: Actually even better is this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_%E2%80%94_renaming_or_splitting_packages Since the new package doesn't provide the octave bindings at all, you probably don't want to include "Provides" (but you will need the "Obsoletes"). Im a little confused -- I have never offered a fedora package called mathgl-octave, as far as I know -- that diff does not include the keyword "%package", which is what I am reading those docs as describing. The "package" that is offered is a .pkg file, which is specific to octave, and should not be visible to yum. The other problem was a missing git commit :/. What's the status of this bug? The NVR problem was fixed quite some time ago -- I cannot comment on the second "problem", as I have no idea what Alex is talking about -- there was never a -octave subpackage, what I am removing is the .pkg file, which is not handled directly by any RPM (build)requires graph. Oh, I should add one thing -- Until it is clear that I have actually addresed this bug correctly, I am loath to close it myself. If someone could clarify what the problem is, if any, I will fix it. OTOH, if there is no problem, can someone else close the bug, or give me the all-clear to do so? This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle. Changing version to '19'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19 (In reply to D Haley from comment #5) > Oh, I should add one thing -- Until it is clear that I have actually > addresed this bug correctly, I am loath to close it myself. If someone could > clarify what the problem is, if any, I will fix it. > > OTOH, if there is no problem, can someone else close the bug, or give me the > all-clear to do so? You used to include an octave module inside the main package, so there's nothing to obsolete or provide after you stopped including it. FWIW, I think you did the right thing disabling the module if it was non-functional. You can safely close this bug. By the way, if you ever re-enable it in the package, please follow the guidelines https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Octave and maybe put it in a subpackage. Octave module is removed for now (version 2.2, wich will be in the repo in a week or so). It will be readded some time later in octave-mathgl subpackage. Some not-very-very-long time later. I think I could close this report with NEXTRELEASE resolution. |