[Bug 459540] Review Request: mediawiki-imagemap

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459540





--- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>  2008-10-24 08:00:35 EDT ---
Well, about today's F-8 broken dependency for mediawiki-imagemap
I tried to mail to Ismael but it is rejected (mail returned).
Would you know why?
So for now I write here about how to fix it. 

Hello, Ismael:

As you know today Michael Schwendt reported that the dependency
of mediawiki-imagemap is broken on F-8 ppc64 [1] as:
-------------------------------------------------
mediawiki-imagemap-0-0.1.r37906.fc8.noarch  requires  mediawiki >= 0:1.13
-------------------------------------------------

This is because on F-8 mediawiki does not support ppc64 at all [2]
(while on F-9+ mediawiki also supports ppc64). So
your last change to make dependency on mediawiki unversioned like:
-------------------------------------------------
-Requires: mediawiki >= 1.13
+Requires: mediawiki
-------------------------------------------------
does not work.
In this case you should use "ExcludeArch" like
-------------------------------------------------
BuildArch: noarch
%if 0%{?fedora} == 8
ExcludeArch: ppc64
%endif
Requires: mediawiki >= 1.13
-------------------------------------------------
This may seem strange because mediawiki-imagemap itself is noarch, however
Fedora package server treats this correctly, so this method is valid [3]

Also, please make it sure that F-8 package has EVR (Epoch-Version-Release)
not larger than F-9, F-10. Currently F-9 mediawiki-imagemap has
$ koji latest-pkg dist-f9-updates mediawiki-imagemap
Build                                     Tag                   Built by
----------------------------------------  -------------------- 
----------------
mediawiki-imagemap-0-0.1.r37906.fc9       dist-f9-updates       olea
so F-8 mediawiki-imagemap must not have "0-0.2.xxxxx" as EVR
(0-0.2.rXXXX.fc8 > 0-0.1.rXXXX.fc9). In this case you can
use "0.1.r37906%{?dist}.1" for release number (see [4] ).

By the way as F-8 support is near end, while it is preferable that
you fix the spec file and build a new srpm for dist-f8-updates-candidate,
I don't think that pushing this (submitting push request on bodhi) for
F-8 branch only to fix dependency problem for ppc64 is needed.
(see: [5] )

[1]
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg02277.html
[2] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=65333
[3] http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2007-October/msg00265.html
[4]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Minor_release_bumps_for_old_branches
[5]
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg02280.html

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.