Am Mittwoch, den 13.05.2009, 19:17 +0200 schrieb Nicolas Chauvet: > 2009/5/13 James Antill <james@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 14:15 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > >> On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 13:15 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > >> > I think the problem is, that some packages notification-deamon instead > >> > of (virtual) desktop-notification-deamon: > > [...] > >> Except that I don't see why those would cause problems during the build, > >> when they're not even getting installed in the buildroots. > >> > >> The problem was/is that libnotify-devel requires a > >> desktop-notification-daemon (via libnotify itself), and yum will install > >> both packages that provide it. > > > > How did you come to this conclusion? > > I'm not saying it's impossible, but the above seems unlikely unless yum > > picks one on the virtual provides hit and then it gets an explicit > > requires on the other (which isn't the same thing). > > xfce4-notifyd : 12 characters > notification-daemon: 19 characters > Short name wins! This is only partly true as Seth pointed out on this list just recently (not sure which topic it was though): IIRC short name wins only applies if both packages provide *exactly* the same thing, and this shouldn't be the case here. > xfce4-notifyd is picked unless something within the > dependencies is hardcoded to notification-daemon. There *are* packages explicitly requiring notification-daemon, so this needs to be rephrased: Why is xfce4-notifyd choosen *although* (!= "unless") some packages are hardcoding notification-daemon, which already satisfies all requirements? Regards, Christoph -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
