Request for review: koffice

Warren Togami wtogami at redhat.com
Fri Jul 22 11:33:24 UTC 2005


Andreas Bierfert wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Jeff Pitman wrote:
> 
>>That's what I was thinking. This is what I'm doing for Python-Twisted 
>>2.x, who've split their packages and use different Versions for each 
>>sub-package. Doing so creates an upgrade path from the previous 
>>monolithic package.
> 
> 
> 
> Just one question with this: Having a koffice-suite package which obsoletes
> koffice (and -i18n) and Requires all the subpackages from the new version should
> do the trick on update. The question is what is needed in koffice-core? Also
> Obsolete the old version or Conflict the old version? What is the best way to go?

I suspect neither Obsoletes nor Conflicts are needed in -core.  You 
should test an upgrade from RH's koffice and koffice-i18n to your set of 
packages (including the koffice-suite which does Obsoletes those two 
packages) using yum in order to be sure.

Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com




More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list