On 7/6/06, Toshio Kuratomi <toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 15:11 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > On 7/6/06, Toshio Kuratomi <toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 13:42 -0700, Christopher Stone wrote: > > The message that this all stems from is here: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-July/msg00050.html > > the quotation by you is that you are requiring php >= 4.2.0 in some > > packages; php >= 4.3.0 in others. php 4.3.3 was already present in > > Fedora Core 1 so the package version is deeply irrelevant for Fedora. > ... > > The rule is whether the lowest version requirement is satisfied by the > > packages on Fedora's target distributions. It may be open to > > interpretation whether "target distribution release" means non-EOL > > distributions (in which case FC4+ currently) or distributions the > > packager is actively building for but in either case, php >= 4.2.0 being > > irrelevant even for FC1 means it is too old. > > I have no problem with just Requiring php instead of php 4.2 because > 4.2 is ancient. Note that even my default spec file: > http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/spectemplate-pear.spec > Does not have any version number listed for php. But I do not see any > harm in actually providing this information, it would seem especially > important for packages that require php 5 or even php 6 when it comes > out. > This is a different ball of wax in the beginning but becomes the same later on. Let's say FC6 is the first FC to provide php-6.0.1 and your package requires php-6.0.0. Then you can list Requires: php >= 6.0.0 in your spec file. Now, a year and a half goes by and FC6 goes EOL. Now the supported platforms are FC7, FC8, and devel. All of these platforms have php >= 6.0.0. So the version information is no longer needed. I don't know if you'll get a bug report asking to remove the versioning (probably no one will notice for quite a while) but new packages should not specify the Requires: php >= 6.0.0 at that point.
I agree 100%. The guidelines should state something like, if it requires a php version < 18 months old, then the version should be specified. Or something like this.
... His posts also show how intradistro dependencies have to account for patches and bugfixes that make a package not-quite the next version. If you're using virtual Provides that represent the upstream package everywhere, how are you going to account for this?
Yes, there may be a case where you have to patch a pear package, and some other pear package must depend on this patch being in place. In a case like this I would think you would use: Requires: php-pear-Foo >= x.x-y Instead of the usual: Requires: php-pear(Foo) >= x.x -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
