Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542715 --- Comment #25 from Kalev Lember <kalev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-05-27 11:47:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) > I don't think it requires provides/obsoletes, as a simple version check would > make this package newer than the other one, and replace it properly. A simple version check would update the package if the name remained the same, but that's not the case here. What used to be rabbitvcs is now rabbitvcs-core. If someone installed rabbitvcs + rabbitvcs-nautilus from upstream page and now updates to the newer version in Fedora repos, the following will happen: 1) rabbitvcs package has no update so it will stay on the upstream version 2) rabbitvcs-nautilus will be updated 3) rabbitvcs-nautilus will pull in rabbitvcs-core 4) yum transaction check will fail because files from old rabbitvcs upstream package and rabbitvcs-core from Fedora repos will conflict. Proper way to fix it is by adding Obsoletes to rabbitvcs-core, but the question is if you want to preserve clean upgrade path from upstream packages or not. > I removed the unresolved dependency for rabbitvcs. It resolved here because I > wasn't properly removing and installing the rpms. I'll get a VM to properly > test the RPMs on a clean install. Yeah, I think it'd be a good idea to install packages from upstream page and try to update them to make sure they can be properly updated without having to uninstall anything by hand. > Thanks a lot for your time and observations. Glad to be of help. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review