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

Re: Incoming: directfb soname problems

On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 21:44 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 10:35 -0700, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> > Log Message:
> > new upstream release
> ...which due to the soname change in it, will break stuff and leave yum
> users without all updates until they figure out what repo they need to
> temporarily disable in case they're using ones that have dependent
> packages.

I hate that too, but it's a design choice in the package installer to
have nothing be upgraded in the case of one problem in the repo.  I've
been told the reasons, so I'm not going to argue over that particular

> This is the second consecutive update to directfb which will cause these
> problems.  I've seen no mail about the change on lists that I follow.

I think Hans did the previous push.  I mailed the maintainers of the
relevant packages (evas and ecore in extras, xine and mplayer somewhere
else)  This is always going to be a problem with directfb - I've
requested a change in their way of maintaining and releasing before but
they choose to keep doing it this way for now.

> The packages are built for all repos all the way down to FC-3 (an "EOL"d
> release).  Looks like nothing was learned from the previous directfb
> mess.  *sigh*

I thought packages that were already in FE3 had a policy of updates
being at the discretion of the packager.  If I'm wrong, then I
apologize, and feel free to pull the package.

> I'm inclined to move the FE-[345] packages at least temporarily away
> from the needsign queue so that it can be discussed/explained why the
> pain is necessary, and if it is, it can be properly announced and people
> (both packagers and users) can prepare.  Objections?

We don't have many packages like directfb afaik that chose to have a
different so name for each release.  AFAIK we don't have a real policy
for a case like this, and when I asked on IRC, people felt it was enough
to warn the affected maintainers.  Which is what I did.

I'm happy to follow any other guidelines if there are others.


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