On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 02:35:29PM -0600, Doug Ledford wrote:
> >>> +%package -n librdmacm-utils
> >>> +Summary: Examples for the librdmacm library
> >>> +Requires: librdmacm%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
> >>
> >> Why the requires? Shouldn't auto shlib dependencies take care of that?
> >
> > Probably. I think this was another legacy bit copied over from a
> > stand-alone spec file.
>
> Actually, no. When you have a -utils package that goes with a library
> package, standard procedure is to tie them directly like this. The auto
> dependency stuff will allow, say, librdmacm-1.1.17-1 and
> librdmacm-utils-1.1.16-1 to happily satisfy each other since the later
> librdmacm provides all of the sonames and apis that the -utils package
> needs. This is as designed as you want a librdamcm update to not
> trigger a required update of, say, openmpi, unless there is truly a
> change that requires it. But, for the utils that go with the library,
> even though we don't *have* to update them with the library, we want
> that to happen automatically, so the explicit requires makes that happen
> even if librdmacm-utils was excluded from the update command.
Okay, Jarod you will need to send a patch to put this back, because I
applied all the changes discussed in this email when I made the pull
request.
Thanks,
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
