Bug 1192754 - gnome-common conflicts with autoconf-archive
Summary: gnome-common conflicts with autoconf-archive
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: gnome-common
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: David King
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-02-15 04:31 UTC by Christopher Meng
Modified: 2015-02-25 13:29 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-02-25 13:29:17 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Patch of the gnome-common.spec (2.10 KB, application/mbox)
2015-02-15 04:31 UTC, Christopher Meng
no flags Details


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
GNOME Bugzilla 729403 0 None None None Never

Description Christopher Meng 2015-02-15 04:31:17 UTC
Created attachment 991820 [details]
Patch of the gnome-common.spec

Hi folks,

With the latest version[1] of autoconf-archive pulled into f21+ testing, tester found that gnome-common ships some macros from autoconf-archive. I can cancel the update but the problem still exists in f22+, and might RHEL as well.

The fact is gnome-common bundles macros from autoconf-archive, and my opinion of this conflict is that gnome-common should %exclude the conflicting files in %files and add Requires: autoconf-archive to the package.

The conflicting files are:

/usr/share/aclocal/ax_check_enable_debug.m4
/usr/share/aclocal/ax_code_coverage.m4

I've attached the patch of the spec file checked out from the repo. Please review. Hopefully this will be fixed ASAP.

[1]---https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-1899/autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21

Comment 1 Christopher Meng 2015-02-15 04:35:29 UTC
The patch also uses the %license macro in spec file to conform to the latest revision of the Packaging Licensing Guideline[1].

[1]---https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines

Comment 2 David King 2015-02-15 09:40:16 UTC
Thanks for the report. I split your commit into two (one for the autoconf-archive fix and one for the %license change), and pushed them to master, f22 and f21 branches.

Do you want to submit an update which includes both packages?

Comment 3 Christopher Meng 2015-02-15 10:44:45 UTC
(In reply to David King from comment #2)
> Thanks for the report. I split your commit into two (one for the
> autoconf-archive fix and one for the %license change), and pushed them to
> master, f22 and f21 branches.
> 
> Do you want to submit an update which includes both packages?

No I think you can submit gnome-common, with less karma for pushing to stable(I will +1 there).

Comment 4 David King 2015-02-15 10:55:46 UTC
I don't thin(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #3)
> No I think you can submit gnome-common, with less karma for pushing to
> stable(I will +1 there).

I don't think that is a good idea. Both packages need to go stable at the same time, and the only way of ensuring that is to add gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21 to the autoconf-archive update.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_update_HOWTO?rd=PackageMaintainers/UpdatingPackageHowTo#Updating_inter-dependent_packages

Comment 5 Christopher Meng 2015-02-15 11:22:13 UTC
OK, but I don't have rights to push updates of gnome-common, so please submit an update if you can.

BTW, shouldn't the updated gnome-common Requires: autoconf-archive as well? Is it serious?

Comment 6 Christopher Meng 2015-02-15 11:23:41 UTC
s/shouldn't/should/

Comment 7 David King 2015-02-15 11:34:20 UTC
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #5)
> OK, but I don't have rights to push updates of gnome-common, so please
> submit an update if you can.

As the page that I linked to explains, you need to ask Release Engineering if you run into permissions problems with multiple packages in an update:

https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/newticket

I can file the ticket if you prefer.

> BTW, should the updated gnome-common Requires: autoconf-archive as well?
> Is it serious?

It does, which seems correct to me (it does not need to BuildRequires, as the macros are not used at build time):

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/gnome-common.git/commit/?h=f21&id=c7e46ed9a7871908e0ce25d214c5393de9c11db4

Comment 8 Christopher Meng 2015-02-16 00:23:10 UTC
Submitted as: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/6106

Comment 9 Pierre-YvesChibon 2015-02-16 06:56:37 UTC
Being a provenpackager, I can create the update, do we have both package built?
Could I have the two exact nevr ?

Comment 10 David King 2015-02-16 08:26:27 UTC
Sure, they are gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21 and autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2015-02-16 08:29:51 UTC
gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21,autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21,autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21

Comment 12 Pierre-YvesChibon 2015-02-16 08:32:09 UTC
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #3)
> No I think you can submit gnome-common, with less karma for pushing to
> stable(I will +1 there).

FTR, this is not good practice nor a good idea (as David already pointed out).

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2015-02-17 08:06:57 UTC
Package gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21, autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21 autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-2158/gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21,autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2015-02-25 13:29:17 UTC
gnome-common-3.14.0-2.fc21, autoconf-archive-2015.02.04-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.