On Friday, June 23, 2017 10:57:11 Mark Wielaard wrote: > On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 10:11 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > On Fri, 2017-06-23 at 09:57 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 17:15 +0200, Petr Šabata wrote: > > > > > > > For the record, there appear to be only 25 binary packages that > > > > depend on /bin coreutils paths[1]; > > > > > > > > > I just took a quick look at the systemtap package. It has: > > > > > > # On RHEL[45], /bin/mktemp comes from the 'mktemp' package. On newer > > > # distributions, /bin/mktemp comes from the 'coreutils' package. To > > > # avoid a specific RHEL[45] Requires, we'll do a file-based require. > > > Requires: /bin/mktemp > > > > > > On RHEL5 the mktemp package only provides a /bin/mktemp and > > > no /usr/bin/mktemp. Now RHEL5 is fairly old and this Requires can be > > > changed for Fedora of course. But it might be that there are other > > > packages that share a spec file between RHEL and Fedora and have a > > > /bin > > > instead of /usr/bin Requires for this reason. > > > > RHEL[45] is dead, so feel free to drop this. Also polluting spec file > > with conditionals (or any other things) for unsupported/unrelated > > distros just create problems. > > > I won't argue about this particular case. RHEL4/5 is indeed pretty old > and I wouldn't mind dropping support for it. > > But in general I like it when my spec files just work for building > packages across Fedora/RHEL/SoftwareCollections even if that requires a > few conditionals. For example I maintain valgrind and have it setup so > that I can use the same spec file to build for "regular" Fedora, but > also do a copr build for older Fedora or CentOS [1]. And the same spec > file can be used to build the Developer Toolset software collection. It > makes sure that there is a way to get the latest upstream (and > backports) make it to different users. Which, in my experience, creates > a better package for everybody since bug fixes are shared. I really appreciate that you take this approach. It helps me a lot when I debug something as I often want to build a Fedora package on RHEL or vice versa. However, it is not what Petr's question was about... He is not asking whether we should remove the /bin/* provides from the coreutils package. He is asking whether we should now introduce them into the coreutils-single package, too. If you are experimenting with packages mixed across distributions, it is unlikely that you have coreutils-single installed. The coreutils-single package is intended for use in Fedora-based containers where you have up2date version of software. On regular installations of Fedora, users will continue to use the coreutils package, which already has these /bin/* provides. Kamil > Cheers, > > Mark > > [1] > https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2017/06/18/valgrind-3-13-0-for-fedora-an > d-centos/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
