https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969700 Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |mario.blaettermann@xxxxxxxx | |m Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Tim Fenn from comment #2) > Provides: libgpp4 = %{version}-%{release} > Obsoletes: libgpp4 < %{version}-%{release} > > seem OK? > That's OK. BTW, just found an appropriate wiki page aboutr how package renaming should be done: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrade_paths_—_renaming_or_splitting_packages#Do_I_need_to_Provide_my_old_package_names.3F Seems a "Provides" tag is useful, but for convenience only. You are not forced to add it. Actually I thought the Obsoletes/Provides mechanism ensures a proper upgrade patch, but is not needed at all. "Obsoletes" is sufficient here, although rpmlint complains if "Provides" is missing. Tim, I will do the final review, but due to a lousy network connection, I'm unable to handle even a 1 MB file. So be patient, I'll do it on saturday. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WkZmGrtK4o&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review