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

Re: Fedora Core 1 Test Update: spamassassin-2.63-0.1



Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:14:02 +0100, shrek-m gmx de wrote:


# rpm -q spamassassin spamassassin-2.60-2

# rpm -Uvh /mnt/sda1/updates/download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/updates/testing/1/i386/spamassassin-2.63-0.1.i386.rpm
Fehler: Failed dependencies:
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is needed by spamassassin-2.63-0.1


# rpm -q perl
perl-5.8.1-92


is --nodeps needed ??


No. An updated test update package will be needed to fix this, as on FC1:

  $rpm --redhatprovides /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
  file /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is not owned by any package

A future Perl package will own more directories and also the vendor
locations. So, presently, an FC1 test update must not and cannot depend on
that directory.


[root laptop root]# rpm -q perl
perl-5.8.1-92
[root laptop root]# rpm --redhatprovides /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
file /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1 is not owned by any package
[root laptop root]# rpm -ivh spamassassin-2.60-2.i386.rpm
Preparing... ########################################### [100%]
1:spamassassin ########################################### [100%]
[root laptop root]# rpm -Uvh spamassassin-2.63-0.1.i386.rpm
Preparing... ########################################### [100%]
1:spamassassin ########################################### [100%]



At first I was like "HUH?" Why does it work for me but not you... but then I found the reason.


[root laptop root]# rpm -qf /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.1
perl-DateManip-5.42-0.fdr.2.a.1
perl-RPM-Specfile-1.13-0.fdr.2.1
perl-Digest-Nilsimsa-0.06-0.fdr.4.1

All perl modules provided by fedora.us seems to own this directory. So this leaves us with two questions:

1) Can someone check if this problem still exists in rawhide?
2) What should we change the Requires to for this FC1 update? I am thinking "Requires perl >= 2:5.8.0" which is like how it was before. It required rebuilding for different pre-FC2 perl versions, but that's acceptable I guess.


See the thread "perl and multilib considerations" from January where this was previously discussed. Since Chip Turner's suggestion of a virtual provides does not exist in these older perl versions, we have to use an imperfect solution. #2 above may be good enough for now.

I'll roll the next FC1 test update when I wake up Wednesday based upon comments here. Just a sanity check please.

Warren




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