On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 10:19 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:50:37 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 14:29 +0000, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: > > > [obexfs] > > > obexfs-0.12-7.fc20.i686 requires libopenobex.so.1 > > > > So, this is orphaned, and the code has now actually been rolled into > > obexftp upstream. The build of obexftp I did yesterday includes the > > obexfs and obexautofs utilities. > > > > What's the appropriate move here? Can we just add obsoletes/provides to > > the obexftp package and then request that obexfs be retired? > > Alternatively, an "obexfs" subpackage could be built. Depending on how > optional these tools are. > > As you say, it includes the same tools (obexfs, obexautofs). Do those > tools do the same thing, or do they only use the same names? There are > no manual pages for them. > > Information for RPM obexfs-0.12-7.fc20.x86_64.rpm > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=4254360 > > Information for RPM obexftp-0.24-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=4734383 > > obexftp contains the same Requires except for libpthread (obexfs depends > on libphread). There's an empty /usr/share/doc/obexftp/html included. They're the same tools, the obefxs source was moved into the obexftp source tree upstream. The thing I was unsure about was dealing with obsoleting an orphaned package. Do I have to adopt the orphaned package first? Or can I just file a request to kill that package? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
