https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111691
--- Comment #15 from David Nichols <david(a)qore.org> ---
(In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #14)
> obsolete-not-provided
First of all, while you can put anything in an Obsoletes tag, only package
names (with/without a version-release range) will actually result in the
specified package(s) getting replaced with another package (or multiple
ones).
Further, anything declared as obsolete breaks existing dependencies on it.
Unless there is a corresponding "Provides" for the obsolete thing.
> Obsoletes: libqore5 < 0.8.12
If there's a "Requires: libqore5 …" anywhere, there would be a broken
dependency, regardless of whether "libqore5" is a physical package %name, a
virtual package name, or something else as a "Provides" tag.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.
2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
> Obsoletes: qore-module-api-0.18
Same here. This capability will be "gone", "hidden" from the
depsolver, and
anything that still depends on it will cause a broken dependency. The
package that contains this Obsoletes tag does not implicitly "Provides" the
obsolete thing.
OK, I tried to read about this stuff, but I did not see this covered in any of
the RPM or packaging guides. I think that I understand now.
So then I will do this instead:
Provides: qore-module(abi) = 0.18
Provides: libqore5 = 0.8.11
Obsoletes: libqore5 < 0.8.12
# provided for backwards-compatibility with unversioned capabilities and will
be removed when the ABI drops backwards-compatibility
Provides: qore-module-api-0.18
Provides: qore-module-api-0.17
Provides: qore-module-api-0.16
Provides: qore-module-api-0.15
Provides: qore-module-api-0.14
Provides: qore-module-api-0.13
Provides: qore-module-api-0.12
Provides: qore-module-api-0.11
Provides: qore-module-api-0.10
Provides: qore-module-api-0.9
Provides: qore-module-api-0.8
Provides: qore-module-api-0.7
Provides: qore-module-api-0.6
Provides: qore-module-api-0.5
Furthermore I hope to have the license text updated in the source by later
today (CET).
Thanks again for your explanations and patience.
thanks,
David
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component