Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
librepo etc. would like to express an RPM dependency on rpm with Sequoia PGP backend. See <https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2556> for the rationale. Could you add to rpm-libs a "Provides: rpm-libs(sequoia)" if rpm.spec is built %{with sequoia}?
I suppose it would also suffice to just remove the option to build without rpm-sequoia?
To elaborate a bit, the non-sequoia option is what will be going away, it's just a matter of when. So while trivial to add, it also seems a bit silly to add something that'll become redundant shortly after. We might just as well remove the non-sequoia option from the spec now.
Removing an option for building rpm without rpm-sequoia is also an option.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 40 development cycle. Changing version to 40.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 42 development cycle. Changing version to 42.
Fixed in rpm-4.20.0-2.fc42.