Re: Backfilling missed packages for `fedora-obsolete-packages`?

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

 



On 15. 04. 21 22:21, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
 From looking at fedora-obsolete-packages' various branches, it looks
like packages are only meant to be listed for one release cycle, and
then removed (so the Rawhide branch's list of packages will get removed
in F36).

Actually, it should be two releases.

How do we handle packages that were not added to this in time? e.g.
when I distro-synced on my F33 box I noticed the following packages are
out of date:

- rxvt, last built for F31, now conflicts with rxvt-unicode

We add them later, when needed, just open bugzillas for fedora-obsolete-packages, with the conflicts you get.

Then I listed all FC31 and FC32 packages and found some more
candidates:

```
~
❯ rpm -qa | grep 'fc31'
adapta-gtk-theme-3.95.0.11-3.fc31.noarch
adapta-gtk-theme-gedit-3.95.0.11-3.fc31.noarch
```

=> this is because, ugh, the package has been failing to build for
newer Fedora releases upstream since Fedora 32:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=26035

```
~
❯ rpm -qa | grep 'fc32'
libquvi-0.9.4-16.fc32.x86_64
fipscheck-lib-1.5.0-8.fc32.x86_64
```

ditto for `libquvi`,
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=12832

`fipscheck`, meanwhile, has not even seen build attempts beyond Fedora
32, https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=7695
as ... it is retired: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fipscheck

In this case, presumably only `rxvt` fits the bill here as it is
causing a conflict, so... perhaps I should add it to `fedora-obsolete-
packages` for F32, F33, and F34? Or just make `rxvt-unicode` properly
Provides+Obsoletes `rxvt`?

Doing it form the "replacing" package is preferred if at all possible. That'll work as well.

The next question is what to do with packages that are no longer
buildable, or are retired, but are still working. Removing it in Fedora
might be overkill, in which case we probably will need to come up with
our own internal version of fedora-obsolete-packages to remove them.

Yes, unless they cause conflicts, or are very insecure, we don't generally remove those from user machines.

--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [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