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

Re: rawhide report: 20080211 changes

Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:44:52 +0300, Peter Lemenkov wrote:

2008/2/14, Xavier Bachelot:
      perl-XML-Xerces-2.7.0_0-4.fc9.i386 requires libxerces-c.so.27
      perl-XML-Xerces-2.7.0_0-4.fc9.x86_64 requires libxerces-c.so.27()(64bit)
      perl-XML-Xerces-2.7.0_0-4.fc9.ppc requires libxerces-c.so.27
      perl-XML-Xerces-2.7.0_0-4.fc9.ppc64 requires libxerces-c.so.27()(64bit)

 Is there a way to blacklist this package from the broken deps nag mail,
 or am I doomed to get it daily until xerces 3.0 is released ?
One possible solution is to provide compat-xerces-c-2.7.0.

As the topic of "compat-" packages has come up elsewhere, too, recently,
please think carefully whether to introduce either




The compat- packages normally do not offer any -devel files you could use
to (re)build other packages with. They are solely for binary compatibility
with available packages, regardless of whether within Fedora or provided
by a 3rd party. That's what the term "compatibility" means in this case.
And we should not confuse the notion with multiple parallel installable
versions of a library and its corresponding -devel packages. If you
considered a compat-xerces-c-devel-2.7.0, that kind of defeats the purpose
of compat- packages, and you could as well drop the "compat-" prefix from
the package namespace and append the SONAME version to the base name, as
in "xerces-c27" and "xerces-c27-devel".

Ok, so if I understand correctly what has been said in the thread, what we want is not compat-xerces-c but xerces-c27. I have forked a new spec from the original xerces-c spec. It should be almost good to go (I still need to clean up the descriptions and summaries. I may also remove the -doc subpackage).


The last remaining problem is the /usr/lib/libxerces-c.so and /usr/lib/libxerces-depdom.so symlinks. They will conflict with the regular xerces-c-devel package. They are currently excluded. Is that the right thing to do ?


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