It looks like we have nothing similar to BuildProvides, so the SRPM has always empty /INFO/PROVIDES "header". E.g. it might be useful for https://pagure.io/pungi/issue/500.
I have trouble imagining what provides in an SRPM would semantically mean. As a place to stuff arbitrary stuff into, no thanks. For packages flagging themselves as multilib (or not) there's bug 653744, discussion is welcome there.
(In reply to Panu Matilainen from comment #1) > I have trouble imagining what provides in an SRPM would semantically mean. > As a place to stuff arbitrary stuff into, no thanks. I could think of self-describing semantics by syntax, e.g.: Provides: multilib-build-marker(foo-libs) Provides: multilib-build-marker(foo-devel) .. thus it would be more about RPM's policy to allow particular format? Dunno, I kind of dislike this too. > For packages flagging themselves as multilib (or not) there's bug 653744, > discussion is welcome there. Cool, thanks for the link. I'll have a look.
No legit dependency use-case has surfaced in a year and half, closing.