https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1193923 --- Comment #17 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- The Obsoletes/Provides pairs are still not correct. > # replace polarssl with mbedtls > > Obsoletes: polarssl < 1.3.10 > Provides: polarssl%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} "Provides: polarssl = …" is missing. That's the one from the Renaming Guidelines that makes available the new package under the old name. Try "dnf install polarssl", for example. It should install "mbedtls" instead of choosing the old polarssl package. > %package devel > Summary: Development files for %{name} > Group: Development/Libraries > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > Obsoletes: polarssl-devel < 1.3.10 > Provides: polarssl-devel%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Same here. Also note that | Provides: polarssl-devel%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} is not needed at all, if nothing depends on polarssl-devel%{?_isa} (e.g. other -devel packages sometimes depend on %_isa -devel packages). And it's not polarssl-devel.x86_64 either. So, if currently somebody runs "dnf install polarssl-devel.x86_64", your Obs/Prov don't cover that yet and don't install mbedtls-devel.x86_64. > %package static > Summary: Static files for %{name} > Group: Development/Libraries > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} It would make more sense to have it depend on the -devel package. -- 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