On 9. 10. 2014 at 08:57:42, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/09/2014 08:41 AM, Petr Spacek wrote: > > On 8.10.2014 23:04, Haïkel wrote: > >> 2014-10-08 20:31 GMT+02:00 Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx>: > >>> Greetings. > >>> > >>> This F21 change: > >>> http://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/RPM-4.12 > >>> > >>> has brought us 'weak dependencies', namely: > >>> > >>> Recommends, Suggests, Supplements and Enhances > >>> > >>> Rpm in f21 and rawhide sees these in spec files and builds fine with > >>> them. createrepo in those branches also exports this into the metadata. > >>> > >>> yum however doesn't do anything with that information. > >>> dnf does (although it's not clear to me what exactly it does do, so > >>> input from dnf maintainers would be great). > >>> > >>> There's 4 packages that are already using these weak deps, but our > >>> default package manager (yum) doesn't understand them. People > >>> installing via yum and installing via dnf will see different behavior. > >>> > >>> I filed a fesco ticket to ask that we ask maintainers to please not add > >>> these until we have guidelines and our default package manager supports > >>> this information: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1353 > >>> > >>> FESCo asked me to post here and see what folks think. > >>> > >>> Should we just ask folks not to use these for now (honor system). > >>> > >>> Should we add a check to redhat-rpm-macros to check packages and fail > >>> the build if they use these tags (for now). > >>> > >>> Should we just not care that people will see different behavior and > >>> leave it up to maintainers? > >>> > >>> Or should we do something else? > >> > >> Since our default package manager does not understand them, it's > >> harmless to leave it up to the maintainers. > >> Most importantly, we need to update packaging guidelines to explain > >> what are the semantic differences between these different tags. But > >> that's a minor update. > >> > >> Before dnf gets promoted as the default package manager, it would be > >> interesting to do some widespread testing. > >> > >> 1. document dnf behavior with weak dependencies and related > >> configuration options > >> 2. let people experiment and provide feedbacks > >> 3. based on feedbacks either propose guidelines or status quo if > >> that's ok > > > > I agree with Haïkel. > > I do not. I agree with Haikel and Petr, we have a great opportunity to test this and see how it works. > > Why should we ban weak dependencies if they really > > do nothing in YUM? > > We need a precise and detailed functional description about what these > "weak dependencies" are supposed to do. Do you mean something like this? http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies > Also, we would need a precise and detailed description of how weak deps > are seen by non-weak-deps aware programs. They are ignored (as demonstrated on the yum example), there is nothing else to it :-) Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
