Bug 741324
Summary: | python-repoze-who-friendlyform from epel overwrites RHEL version | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora EPEL | Reporter: | Moritz Baumann <baumanmo> |
Component: | python-repoze-who-friendlyform | Assignee: | Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | el6 | CC: | jpokorny, tcallawa, timm2k |
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: | 2011-10-17 17:16:58 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
Moritz Baumann
2011-09-26 15:19:21 UTC
I'm not sure how EPEL is expected to know about the contents of "extra" channels for third party RHEL offerings. So should I file a bug against luci or the python-repoze-who-friendlyform-1.0-0.3.b3.el6.noarch.rpm from RHEL? I just think its a bad thing that an epel package breaks the functionality of a RHEL package (be it from core or extra channel) and my question is where/who to correctly address this issue. Best, Moritz I have no idea. While I sympathize with your concern, I'm not sure I can replace the EPEL package with the older RHEL version at this point. well maybe the other way around works?
Maybe it is possible to push this package to rhel-ha and fix the dependencies (although I have not checked what other packages rely on this package (or the rhel-ha version)?
Our first work around (using the epel package) was just to change the line
< WebOb>=0.9.7
> WebOb>=0.9.6
in
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/repoze.who_friendlyform-1.0.8-py2.6.egg-info/requires.txt
I'm not sure if this actually breaks something or not.
Another option would be provide a python-webob-0.9.7....noarch and require this in your package since you require this implicitely
in /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/repoze.who_friendlyform-1.0.8-py2.6.egg-info/requires.txt
Best,
Moritz
I think the best solution here is to exclude the conflicting package via yum. In your /etc/yum.repos.d/epel.repo (or whatever it is named), under [epel-6] (or again, whatever it is named) add: exclude=python-repoze-who-friendlyform I do not believe it is possible to account for non-core RHEL offerings in EPEL, nor do I wish to change the WebOb requires to 0.9.6 (I'm sure upstream set it to 0.9.7 for a reason, but at this point, I can't easily discover why), and I am uninterested in maintaining a python-webob098 package and patching python-repoze-who-friendlyform to use it. *** Bug 750474 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** From that duplicate (bug 750474 comment 6): Side note: But to be honest, what is the real problem in this particular case (at least from what I have seen) is broken consistency between EPEL's RPM and contained Python package metadata, more specifically package dependencies. I have filled bug 750931 to address this. Still and once again, luci + EPEL packages combination is discouraged. |