On 11/16/05, Steve G <linux_4ever@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There are packaging problems not being reported by the automatic rawhide report. > The Obsoletes tag is supposed to take care of this removal or upgrades may not > work correctly. Not sure if there's a way to automatically detect that Obsolete > tags are not covering everything they need to. The rawhide report doesn't make any attempt to look at Obsoletes. The rawhide reporting script checks for self-consistency and makes an effort to record removed packages, new packages and updated packages incrementally between runs. But you can not rely on this report to be an exhaustive list of removals or additions..simply because the report itself might not be generated every day. Once a package is removed from rawhide.. if it remains on client systems it WILL cause dependance resolution problems on the client at some point in the future that cannot be seen by any reporting tool that looks solely at the self-consistency of the rawhide tree. Testers should be aware of that eventuality and be able to check to see if the package is still in the tree. The question as to whether or not the package was suppose to be obsoleted by something else is impossible to answer without talking to the package maintainer. Some packages are meant to be dropped and not obsoleted by anything. > I'm using x86_64, not sure if that makes a difference. shrug... HelixPlayer is not in the 64bit tree.. and it is self-consitently packaged in the 32bit tree. Perhaps you have a client side configuration problem and don't have the 32bit tree enabled to retrive the 32bit version of the new libXp package to fill the 32 bit dep. If thats the case.. its a client configuration error and not a packaging one. > > >> Error: Missing Dependency: libssl.so.5 is needed by package w3c-libwww > >> Error: Missing Dependency: libcrypto.so.5 is needed by package > >> w3c-libwww > > w3c-libwww removed from the tree > > So...what Obsoleted it? Who said it was obsoleted or was suppose to be obsoleted? Packages can be flat out dropped. This one was dropped in June according to the rawhide reports....packages don't have to be obsoleted to leave rawhide. w3c-libwww-* is yet another example of items that have left Core and may or may not be re-published in Extras based on community interest to maintain it. I don't think there is any sane way to automate scripted checks to look for "out of tree" dependancy issues that take 4 months to show up on rawhide boxes because of removed packages. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
