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

Re: 5.1 -> 5.2 move

Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 02:09:29PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Stephen John Smoogen (smooge gmail com) said:
I don't think we have one. We have dealt with the older policy where
things conflicted with 5.1 but not 5.0.

What exactly are the packages having problems?
gtkhtml3 was rebased in 5.2, changing ABI. We can ship (in EPEL)
a gtkhtml38 package, but it will conflict at the file level with
gtkhtml3 from 5.1 and earlier.

The solution could be, in RHEL, to have gtkhtml38 obsolete gtkhtml3
versions with version <= 3.8. It cannot be done in EPEL since obsoleting
RHEL packages is not allowed.

gtkhtml3 would be brought in either by devel dependencies, or by
dependencies on the soname.

OK ... I have created a package that conflicts with gtkhtml3 < 3.12.1

we will be putting it in centos-5.2 extras (after it goes through the centos QA process).

Here are testing RPMS:


This was tested with gnucash and mysql-query-browser and it seemed to work OK with the new gtkhtml3 installed as well.

Johnny Hughes

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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