On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 04:35:49PM +0100, James Hogarth wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2016 16:07, "Phil Sutter" <psutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 12:55:40PM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > > If you have:
> > >
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Maybe you already thought about this, but I'd add
> > > Recommends: iproute-tc to the main package, and
> >
> > I guess that's merely a hint, right?
> >
>
> At this time dnf installs recommended packages listed at the same time, but
> having it excluded will not fail the install.
Yes. Basically someone who types 'dnf install iproute' in F24+ will
get both packages, but it is still possible to create an image without
the -tc subpackage.
> > > Requires: iproute-tc = %{version}-%{release} to tc subpackage.
> >
> > Why should iproute-tc require itself? Could you please explain the
> > effect this has?
>
> I assume he meant have iproute-tc require the mass matching iproute version
> to ensure they are kept in sync when both are installed.
Yep, sorry for the typo.
> > Obsoletes: %{name}%{isa} < the-new-version-release
>
> Hmm. Shouldn't this be '%{?_isa}' instead? At least that's what
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ArchSpecificRequires
> recommends. Not sure if that is up to date, though.
In the other part of the thread Panu writes that this doesn't work.
Zbyszek
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
