Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 494678
Repository version is obsolete
Last modified: 2009-04-17 14:05:48 EDT
Battle for wesnoth was released in the 1.6 version
We should update the current version, because current is 1.4.7
Rawhide has version 1.6. Did you perhaps mean to file this against F-10?
(In reply to comment #1)
> Rawhide has version 1.6. Did you perhaps mean to file this against F-10?
yes, I made a mistake :- )
Warren, I forget, does F-10 currently support the noarch subpackages like F-11 does? Other than that, any objections? I'm on the fence here. It's not too long until F-11 comes out. . .
I thought we can't upgrade to a new major version because it breaks saved game files?
I think koji can handle noarch subpackages for F-10 too, but I need to adjust koji to remove the noarch extra arch (old style of noarch subpackage).
That was true for 1.4.x, as I recall, as well as that we had an, um, *spirited* discussion on the games list about this. Not sure if that's true for this release, though. I don't see anything mentioning this in the manual or CHANGELOG.
You mean you can upgrade from 1.4 to 1.6 and not break saved games?
(Note: I don't particularly care that saved games break.)
A bunch of saved games from 1.4 in my homedir are not in the "Load" dialog of wesnoth-1.6.
(I don't think this should stop us from upgrading wesnoth, but this decision is up to you.)
rpm changelog agrees with you about noarch subpackages. If my local 1.6 goes smoothly, I'll update F-10.
Local build was fine.
Koji build failed due to unpackaged debuginfo files?
wesnoth-1.6-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
Hmm. Thanks Dennis! What was wrong?
it was not setup to build new style noarch subpackages in F-10. The handling of noarch packaging in this package has been poorly handled. new style noarch subpackages were not supposed to be introduced in Fedora 10.
I guess I misunderstood what Warren meant in #4, and took the comments in rpm's changelog to mean that this wouldn't be an issue. I didn't realize extra hoops on the backend in koji were required.
What would be a better way to structure the spec in this case?
If it is built for F-10 now, it will work in F-10 from now on. F-9 however cannot build in this way.
Nor would I consider building 1.6 there. . .
wesnoth-1.6-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
If you want to test the update, you can install it with
su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update wesnoth'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-3555
Testing this now.
If this goes in, that should also close the three security issues:
wesnoth-1.6-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.