https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1171129 --- Comment #13 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Mattias Ellert from comment #12) > The "description-line-too-long" rpmlint error can be easily fixed by > adding a line break in the long line. Done. > [!]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and > Provides are present. > A) There is an Obsoletes, but no Provides. Is this intentional? Yes, it doesn't provide the previous package. There are sufficient differences to make that pointless. I don't even ship a binary which I believe is obsolete (radius.login). > Anyway, the Obsoletes (and Provides if added) should be versioned > Obsoletes: radiusclient-ng-utils < 0.5.6-13 > Provides: radiusclient-ng-utils = %{version}-%{release} It obsoletes any version of that package. These projects were merged at some point. I could add a version if you insist but I see it problematic as I don't control the other package and while unlikely the maintainer could push a new version. > B) What will happen with the other packages built from the > radiusclient-ng source rpm (radiusclient-ng and -devel)? They will have to be ported to that library. > Will the whole package be retired, or only the -utils subpackage > dropped? If the whole package will be retired, the corresponding > new packages should Obsolete the old packages also for these. A > Provides probably shouldn't be addad here though since it is > probably not a "compatible enough replacement" since names of > header files and libraries are different. I have no control over the other library. I have opened bug #1170578, but it's up to that maintainer to retire it when he deems necessary (and when there are no longer dependencies of it). The projects are different enough for them to stay in Fedora (except for the utils). > Have you coordinated the transition with the maintainer of the > radiusclient-ng package? No, I got no response from him. > Generic: > [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. > Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached > diff). Thanks, it seems I'll need to rebuilt it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review