Re: Is my package a special Conflict: snowflake?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 09:59:34AM -0500, Randy Barlow wrote:
> Hello fellow Fedora hackers!
> 
> I am in a sticky packaging situation, and I think setting a Conflicts:
> in my package might be the solution. According to the Conflict
> guidelines[0], making a case here is a good way to go.

You don't state the actual conflict anywhere in this mail, so my
reply is based on my guess what the problem is.

The guidelines are explicit in stating that Conflicts should not be
used, except as last resort.

Let me add another reason for avoiding Conflicts that has become more
prominent over time: upgrades. Based on the bug reports for
dnf-plugin-system-upgrade conflicts between packages are *the* most
common reason for what users consider to be upgrade failures. When an
upgrade fails with an inscrutable DNF error about some conflicting
packages, for many users the program might just as well have crashed,
and they are not able to solve the issue without help. Even though
package conflicts are "legatimate", they must be avoided.

> jcline and I have been working for a number of weeks on getting the
> ejabberd package updated. It's been unmaintained for quite some time,
> and so updating it involved adding 15 more packages. Unfortunately
> during the process, I failed to notice that the dependency that ejabberd
> needed called "xmlrpc" was not the same upstream as the Fedora package
> "erlang-xmlrpc". We really want to get this in before the F24 branch in
> a week and change, so there's not much time to add the xmlrpc that
> ejabberd needs.
> 
> One possibility that I've been investigating is renaming the new package
> to erlang-rds13_xmlrpc (rds13 being the github account that owns it),
> but it's non trivial and means applying lots of patching to both it and
> to ejabberd.
How much patching? It should be posible to just sed the new name in.
Also under the new bundling guidelines [1] you can bundle the other
version. Since the plan is to move to a different dependency soon
anyway, this is imho tottally reasonable in this case.

Zbyszek

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Bundling_and_Duplication_of_system_libraries
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux