[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

rpm definitions of Obsoletes/Provides/... (was: RFC: Soname in rpm name)

On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 10:56:17AM -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Obsoletes: has changed to erase a package that contains a virtual
> provides for exactly this reason.

Unless it is provided by the same package like the usual

Provides: foo
Obsoletes: foo [<= ...]

But it is even worse, if two different packages provide/obsolete foo,
now they obsolete each-other, too. That's unexpected behaviour IMHO.

Furthermore Provides: currently also effectively implies Obsoletes,
but only for non-virtual Provides (e.g. a package name). That's the
bug^Wfeature that has troubled PyVault and others so much.

So I agree with Jeff. There is a high need for strict definitions of
what these semantics express and what rpm (and thus rpm-based
resolvers) should do with it.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

Attachment: pgp00175.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]