Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: evolution-brutus Alias: evolution-brutus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203520 ------- Additional Comments From colding@xxxxxxxxx 2006-09-07 07:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #20) > (In reply to comment #19) > > > * Why does this package use Autoreq: no ? > > > This description forbids finding libraries requirements, which I think > > > is quite unwilling. Even if you want to specify version-related > > > requirements, "Autoreq: no" is unnecessary because you can simply add > > > the requirements in addition to auto-finding requirements. > > > > Please believe me when I say that I didn't do this lightly. The thing that > > forced me to disable Autoreg is that at least one of the libraries (libebook if > > I rememver correctly) that are provided internally by e-d-s changed version from > > one stable release to another. I observed that when I: > > > > 1) Installed evolution-brutus for testing > > 2) Un-installed evolution-brutus > > 3) did "yum update" > > 4) Attempted to install evolution-brutus once more. This was now not possible > > due to Autoreq finding that one of the internal e-d-s libraries had changed > > version. > > > > The only way that I could fix this (please correct me if I'm wrong) was to > > disable Autoreq. > > This sounds to me like a regular shared library update that would require this > package to be rebuilt against the updated e-d-s? What's different here that > makes this not the case? That is surely one way to fix it. My gripe with this is that perfectly fine RPMs that installed with, say, eds-1.4.1 won't install with eds-1.4.1 due to the changed version of some internal library in eds. I wouldn't mind to just rebuild the RPMs if the library in question had API changes, but API changes in a stable eds release serie should'nt happen, right? Anyway, I won't mind one bit to re-enable Autoreq if that is the right thing to do. Thoughts? jules -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review