On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 18:02 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > Am 31.01.2013 17:56, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Am 31.01.2013 17:43, schrieb Miloslav Trmač: > >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" > >>> <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> On 01/31/2013 04:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >>>>> That would be the default between MariaDB and Mysql. Which are (at > >>>>> least for now mostly) compatible. So, if a package can use that > >>>>> interface, we prefer them to use MariaDB. They can't use both at the > >>>>> same time. > >>>> > >>>> Which fesco members is going to handle those changes? > >>> > >>> The MariaDB feature includes using provides/obsoletes on the "mysql" > >>> names, so the transition should be automatic for most packages. > >> > >> with provides/obsoletes it would be IMPOSSIBLE to install mysql > >> because ANY update to the mariadb package would replace it > > > > Incorrect. Feel free to read the FESCo meeting log for details > > i do not need to read any theory > and why have you stripped the relevant part below? > > Obsoletes: dovecot-mysql > Provides: dovecot-mysql > > was used by me two days ago for my private dovecot-builds to > no longer spilt out "dovecot-mysql" to a seperate apckage as > the fedora one does I haven't read the FESCo logs, but here's the obvious thing you're missing: you're only considering *unversioned* obsoletes. Consider this (version numbers are simplified as this is just an example): F18 contains mysql-5.0.0-1.fc18 F19 contains mysql-5.0.0-2.fc19 and mariadb-1.0-1.fc19 mariadb-1.0-1.fc19 can have this: Obsoletes: mysql < 5.0.0-2.fc19 Provides: mysql I believe this would result in mysql being replaced with mariadb on upgrade from F18 to F19, but mysql-5.0.0-2.fc19 still being installable. I'll take a guess that may have been what was in the FESCo log. We'd have to ensure the F18 package's version never exceeded the F19 mariadb package's Obsoletes: threshold, of course, but that's not an insurmountable barrier if you plan for it. I believe the packaging guidelines recommend that Obsoletes be versioned and discourage them being unversioned - precisely to allow for the 'resurrection' of the obsoleted package in future, if it seems advisable. This is really just a planned, very short term version of that. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
