On Sun, 8 Jun 2008, David Timms wrote:
Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip <at> kanarip.com> writes:
Would a "Obsoletes: pirut" have been more accurate and appropriate here?
There's both an Obsoletes and a Provides, the Obsoletes makes sense, the
Provides not really, and it causes issues like this.
It would sort of make sense to be able say in a spec:
Provides: pirut(functionality)
ie equivalent functionality = gui package management
rather than the pirut(api) ?
"Pirut" is just a name and an implementation detail, you'd want something
along the lines of "Provides: package-manager-gui" similarly to httpd
providing "webserver" etc, that apps just wanting a GUI package manager
can depend on. Blindly adding provides for everything obsoleted is just
BAD, unless they actually provide a compatible interface (be it API or
command names).
- Panu -
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
