On Tue, 2023-04-04 at 10:19 -0400, Steven A. Falco wrote: > On 4/4/23 09:56 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 9:49 AM Steven A. Falco > > <stevenfalco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 4/4/23 05:58 AM, sergio@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > On 2023-04-03 21:13, Steven A. Falco wrote: > > > > > I'm confused by the Requires for redhat-lsb-core. > > > > > > > > > > According to "dnf repoquery --requires redhat-lsb-core" there > > > > > is no > > > > > requirement for esmtp. But according to "dnf repoquery -- > > > > > whatrequires > > > > > esmtp", redhat-lsb-core does require esmtp. > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps there is some sort of transitive requirement that the > > > > > above > > > > > commands don't show, but the curious thing is that I have > > > > > redhat-lsb-core installed on my F37 machine, and that didn't > > > > > pull in > > > > > esmtp. > > > > > > > > Please open a bug report , I'm reviewing redhat-lsb [1] , this > > > > package is so old that still called redhat ... > > > > Anyone suggest another name ? > > > I'm happy to write a bug. Do you prefer something along the > > > lines of "Split lsb_release into a subpackage" or perhaps "Split > > > redhat-lsb-core into finer-grained subpackages"? > > > > > > For me, having an lsb_release subpackage would be best, because > > > that is all I need for KiCad. But I'll also pursue Neal's > > > comment about changing wxWidgets to get the info another way. > > > > > > > The distro command from python3-distro may also help if you *must* > > use > > a command-line tool. > > > > But reading the file directly would be better. > > I've created a bug [2] requesting that wxGTK use a file from os- > release rather than lsb_release. > > > Worst case scenario, I could bring over a port of SUSE's > > lsb_release > > package that uses os-release for its data into Fedora[1]. > > That is a very interesting approach that could potentially help other > customers of the information. > > Steve > > > [1]: > > https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ngompa/lsb_release-shim-el9/ > > [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2184391 Hi, Sorry for delay ... I'm planing bring redhat-lsb to epel9 soon , because will avoid many confusions . lsb_release-shim-el9 and https://github.com/thkukuk/lsb-release_os-release is very interesting for me, I will check Basically we need or should provide /usr/bin/lsb_release which gives information of the system like [1] , all the rest is meta packages and meta information that I think we don't need and in others cases are completely obsolete, but have a tool which identify the operating system in a standard way, I think is still valid . [1] lsb_release -a LSB Version: :core-4.1-amd64:core-4.1-noarch:cxx-4.1-amd64:cxx-4.1- noarch:desktop-4.1-amd64:desktop-4.1-noarch:languages-4.1- amd64:languages-4.1-noarch:printing-4.1-amd64:printing-4.1- noarch:trialuse-4.1-amd64:trialuse-4.1-noarch Distributor ID: Fedora Description: Fedora release 37 (Thirty Seven) Release: 37 Codename: ThirtySeven -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
