https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1324590 --- Comment #8 from Don Dutile <ddutile@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ira Weiny from comment #7) > (In reply to Honggang LI from comment #3) > > Paul, > > Please replace the package name hfi-psm1 with libpsm2, as we had imported > > it into RHEL-7.2 with name 'libpsm2'. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1173296 > > > > This seems like a RHEL specific issue. AFAIK no patch was ever submitted > upstream to make this change. Blindly changing this now will affect other > users which have chosen to use the package as it is. > > If you have a patch which will correctly obsolete the existing packages we > would be happy to review it. Have to agree w/Ira -- if upstream didn't change the name, and users are familiar with the package name as-is, we should change RHEL. OPA support in RHEL is 'tech-preview', so we can change anything we want, until it goes to 'fully supported'. The name change was probably involved in the hastily put together workaround with the psm1-psm2 name conflicts when both packages were installed on a system (that had opa & qib on it, for example). The multi-fabric, not-all-OPA config must be supported, so as long as the upstream <*>psm<*> libraries have been cleaned up to make this work (without different compile options to compat-libs, breaking old psm apps), then we should change RHEL-7 to reflect upstream. According to a rather long email thread, the library incompatibility/name-collision issue has been solved, so RHEL should be able to mimic rest of upstream wrt naming. -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx