On 9.10.2014 09:27, Jan Zelený wrote:
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
It would be nice if words "weak dependencies" at
http://rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.12.0
linked to
http://rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Dependencies#Weakdependencies
Jan, do you have rights to add the link to the rpm.org wiki? I don't have
account myself ...
Petr^2 Spacek
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
