Request for review/sponsor: boa-constructor

[Alex Lancaster]

>>>>> "KC" == Kevin Cole  writes:


[...]

KC> Thanks... but... ;-) I guess I've mixed and matched from
KC> non-Fedora sources more than I remembered. Should I then repackage
KC> the wxPython that I got from the Python web site, since it goes by
KC> a rather ungainly name and appears to be ahead of what's in
KC> Extras?  Specifically should I try to make the names of the
KC> following more closely match Fedora's?  What I've installed are:

Packages in Extras can only depend: Extras + Core + Updates.  Mixing
and matching non-Fedora sources for dependent packages is not
supported.

If boa-constructor needs wxPython 2.6 then you need to co-ordinate
with the current wxPython maintainer to get them to update their
package to 2.6, otherwise just build against the current version in
Extras which is wxPythonGTK2-2.4.2.4-7.

You cannot use/depend/build against a version of wxPython that is not
in currently in Extras.

KC>   wxPython2.6-devel-gtk2-unicode-2.6.1.0-1_py2.4.i386.rpm
KC> wxPython2.6-gtk2-unicode-2.6.1.0-1_py2.4.i386.rpm
KC> wxPython-common-gtk2-unicode-2.6.1.0-1_py2.4.i386.rpm

KC> And a naive question: Why didn't rpm complain when I installed my
KC> boa-constructor, since none of my packages is named wxPython?
KC> ("rpm -q wxPython" reports that no such beastie is installed.)

As explained by Paul, it appears that wxPythonGTK2 "Provides:"
wxPython, so your "Requires:" statement should be sufficient, however
it might be safer to be more explicit if boa-constructor needs a GTK2
version (and wouldn't otherwise work with a GTK1 version) to use the
explicit wxPythonGTK2 in "Requires:".  Not sure what the best thing to
do is in this circumstance.

Alex