Hey all--
So, I'm running across this in a review. RPM picks up an unversioned
requires and the submitter has an explicit versioned requires in the
spec file; it ends up coming across as:
perl(Params::Util)
perl(Params::Util) >= 0.33
Now, I've always been of the understanding "one or the other, but not
both", especially when one is manually specified in the spec file. As
such, I've been treating this as a blocker.
However, should it be a blocker? In the case of a provides, the
answer is clear: having an unversioned provides together with a
versioned provides defeats the purpose of a versioned provides, as the
unversioned one will satisfy the request for any version of that
module. But the logic works the other way around with requires: a
package with versioned and unversioned requires will cause a package
that satisfies the strictest of the two to be installed. (We also see
this sort of "layered" requires happening when we do things like
"requires: foo >= 1, foo <= 2") I can also see a case where automated
tools (cpanspec, CPANPLUS::Dist::RPM/Fedora) read versioning
information from the dist directly, and this is often more precise
than what rpm finds.
So... Should this be a blocker? Or should it just be considered
"bonus", something that doesn't hurt but indeed makes the requires
metadata a touch more precise?
-Chris
--
Chris Weyl
Ex astris, scientia
--
Fedora Extras Perl SIG
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl
Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
