On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 01:33:03 +0200, David Nielsen wrote: > > > For Fedora 6 there is no problem yet, since the build is blocked in > > > needsign for now. But your fix in CVS > > > > > > # Replaces old unmanaged DBus-sharp implementation > > > Provides: dbus-sharp = 0.64 > > > -Provides: mono(dbus-sharp) > > > +Provides: mono(dbus-sharp) = 0.64 > > > Obsoletes: dbus-sharp < 0.64 > > > > > > won't suffice, since nothing obsoletes dbus-sharp-devel yet, and f-spot in > > > Core and banshee in Extras would still need a rebuild because they require > > > a different EVR. > > > > And since this is '6' not '7', Core cannot build against Extras, > > so, this thing needs more work. > > What would you propose, sadly the timing is really bad as I'm leaving to > go to a wedding and will likely be out of reach till after Monday. What I propose is: focus on F7 and/or F8 and treat F6 as a stable distribution. If ndesk-dbus* serves as a bug-fix upgrade for F6, prepare the full set of updates and talk to authoritative Fedora people, i.e. FESCo, on how to proceed. Because a package in Extras would obsolete Core (a MUSTNOT), and a package in Core that is broken in the process would need a fix or a rebuild (the latter is a CANTFIX unless f-spot were moved into Extras). > Clearly you are right with regards to FC-6, I'd love to replace it with > ndesk-dbus across the board but that is not going to happen it seems. > How about retracting for FC-6? ndesk-dbus for F6 has not been released from needsign yet. ;) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
