[Guidelines Change] Conflicts

[Jesse Keating]

On Monday 07 May 2007 17:28:30 Roland McGrath wrote:
> rpm itself ought to be changed too.  Otherwise using rpm by hand to upgrade
> elfutils-devel.i386 and elfutils-libs.x86_64 can leave
> elfutils-devel.x86_64 an old one that failed to properly conflict with
> upgrading elfutils-libs.

That may have been the case a while ago, but now if you have a .so symlink in 
your -devel package, it will have a proper file level requirement on the arch 
specific -libs (or base) package that the symlink points to.  If you have 
both elfutils-devel.x86_64 and elfutils-libs.x86_64 and elfutils-libs.i386 
and tried to upgrade just elfutils-libs.x86_64 and elfutils-devel.i386 it 
would fail.  elfutils-devel.x86_64 would have a file requires on the soname 
that is only provided by elfutils-libs.x86_64 of the matching version.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070507/5169aa45/attachment.sig>