Fedora Core 1 Test Update: spamassassin-2.63-0.1

[Warren Togami]

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:14:02 +0100, shrek-m at gmx.de wrote:
> 
> 
>># rpm -q spamassassin spamassassin-2.60-2
>>
>># rpm -Uvh 
>>/mnt/sda1/updates/download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/testing/1/i386/spamassassin-2.63-0.1.i386.rpm
>>Fehler: Failed dependencies:
>>        /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is needed by spamassassin-2.63-0.1
>>
>># rpm -q perl
>>perl-5.8.1-92
>>
>>
>>is  --nodeps   needed ??
> 
> 
> No. An updated test update package will be needed to fix this, as on FC1:
> 
>   $rpm --redhatprovides /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
>   file /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is not owned by any package
> 
> A future Perl package will own more directories and also the vendor
> locations. So, presently, an FC1 test update must not and cannot depend on
> that directory.
> 

[root at laptop root]# rpm -q perl
perl-5.8.1-92
[root at laptop root]# rpm --redhatprovides /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
file /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is not owned by any package
[root at laptop root]# rpm -ivh spamassassin-2.60-2.i386.rpm
Preparing...                ########################################### 
[100%]
    1:spamassassin           ########################################### 
[100%]
[root at laptop root]# rpm -Uvh spamassassin-2.63-0.1.i386.rpm
Preparing...                ########################################### 
[100%]
    1:spamassassin           ########################################### 
[100%]


At first I was like "HUH?"  Why does it work for me but not you... but 
then I found the reason.

[root at laptop root]# rpm -qf /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
perl-DateManip-5.42-0.fdr.2.a.1
perl-RPM-Specfile-1.13-0.fdr.2.1
perl-Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06-0.fdr.4.1

All perl modules provided by fedora.us seems to own this directory.  So 
this leaves us with two questions:

1) Can someone check if this problem still exists in rawhide?
2) What should we change the Requires to for this FC1 update?  I am 
thinking "Requires perl >= 2:5.8.0" which is like how it was before.  It 
required rebuilding for different pre-FC2 perl versions, but that's 
acceptable I guess.

See the thread "perl and multilib considerations" from January where 
this was previously discussed.  Since Chip Turner's suggestion of a 
virtual provides does not exist in these older perl versions, we have to 
use an imperfect solution.  #2 above may be good enough for now.

I'll roll the next FC1 test update when I wake up Wednesday based upon 
comments here.  Just a sanity check please.

Warren