On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 02:19:57PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote:
> On 19. 06. 24 12:34, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > 4. We have packages which use filepath Requires on paths in %_sbindir.
> > Such packages will FTI when the_providing_ package is rebuilt with
> > the new value of %_sbindir. To keep those packages working, I made
> > a list of all such filepath dependencies in Fedora and prepared
> > patches for the provider packages to add a virtual Provides for the
> > old name, e.g. [5]. This means that the provider package has
> > Provides:/usr/sbin/foo before the merge and
> > Provides:/usr/bin/foo,/usr/sbin/foo when rebuilt after the merge.
> >
> > I'll rebuild all packages that need to add the virtual Provides in
> > the side tag too.
>
> So, recently I saw this:
>
> Requires(post): %{_sbindir}/alternatives
> Requires(postun): %{_sbindir}/alternatives
>
> And I checked the alternatives package (chkconfig component). It does not
> manually provide /usr/sbin/alternatives. There is no open pull request.
> Your email made it sound like this is all ready, but I don't see it.
A general clarification: for packages that were or will be "fixed" to have
the new Provides, the Provides are conditionalized on %_sbindir==%_bindir,
so they are NOT visible until rebuilt in a build root with the merge.
So at this point in time there should be no such provides in any
(binary) packages.
In the particular case of alternatives.rpm, the pull request was
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chkconfig/pull-request/13,
which then became https://github.com/fedora-sysv/chkconfig/pull/131.
> So, what is the list of the packages and the prepared patches?
