On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:02 AM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 2017-02-16 19:33 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> 2017-02-16 19:26 GMT+01:00 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> ---
>>> kernel.spec | 1 -
>>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel.spec b/kernel.spec
>>> index 4363050..38968ba 100644
>>> --- a/kernel.spec
>>> +++ b/kernel.spec
>>> @@ -815,7 +815,6 @@ Summary: Development package for building kernel modules to match the %{?2:%{2}
>>> Group: System Environment/Kernel\
>>> Provides: kernel%{?1:-%{1}}-devel-%{_target_cpu} = %{version}-%{release}\
>>> Provides: kernel-devel-%{_target_cpu} = %{version}-%{release}%{?1:+%{1}}\
>>> -Provides: kernel-devel = %{version}-%{release}%{?1:+%{1}}\
>>> Provides: kernel-devel-uname-r = %{KVERREL}%{?variant}%{?1:+%{1}}\
>>> Provides: installonlypkg(kernel)\
>>> AutoReqProv: no\
>>> --
>>> 2.7.4
>>>
>>
>> So, this was the "light description version" of the patch.
>> please see a full rationale here http://bugzilla.redhat.com/1420754
>> Basically, this patch make the situation in sync with el7 kernel WRT
>> theses provides.
>> There is one virtual provides kernel-devel-uname-r
>> Other are real (packages) provides.
>>
>> That will restore the ability to prefer one kernel-devel varriant over
>> another one as (such as kernel-debug-devel).
>> In the current situation every kernel-devel varriant have this
>> kernel-devel (virtual) provide.
>
> Any answer from the kernel team about this ?
I'm not on the kernel team any longer. However, I went digging and
this was fixed 2 years ago in RHEL for the exact same reasons with the
exact same fix. So I guess ACK from me.
josh
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
