I'm going to do mass bug filling for those packages which are still not fixed. Are there some scripts to do that or I have to write my own?
Unfixed packages: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/broken-obsoletes/latest/broken-obsoletes.txt On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Igor Gnatenko <ignate...@redhat.com> wrote: > All guidelines mandate the use of </<= Obsoletes, but unfortunately we > have some number of packages (179 source rpms -> 292 binary rpms) with > unversioned Obsoletes or with >/=/>= Obsoletes. > > It is causing problems with upgrade (if package is getting re-added) > or with 3rd-party repositories. Older package is obsoleting new > package. > > Problem categories (in following text by "never" I mean latest N-2 releases): > > * Package/SubPackage was never built in Fedora > Package "python" has "Obsoletes: python2" which was never built -> > drop Obsoletes > SubPackage "qpid-proton-c" of "qpid-proton" has "Obsoletes: > qpid-proton" which was not the package for long time -> drop Obsoletes > > * Package replacement > Package "storaged" has "Obsoletes: udisks2" -> take latest version > from koji (2.1.7-1) and make Obsoletes versioned: udisks2 < 2.1.7-2 > storaged is not simple use-case as it replaces udisks2, but latter is > still not retired. > > * "=" Obsoletes > "rubygem-vte" has "Obsoletes: ruby-vte = 3.0.9-1.fc26" (probably it's > macro in spec) which seems really weird as it will not obsolete > F24/F25 with such version > > * Obsoletes by Provides > It doesn't work to prevent undefined behavior. Imagine you have > installed "A" and "B", both providing "C". Package "D" has "Obsoletes: > C", it should not remove "A" and "B". > ** %{?_isa} > "glibc-headers" has "Obsoletes: glibc-headers(i686)". %{?_isa} is just > text, it's not part of architecture or something else. > ** Other provides > "rubygem-http_connection" has "Obsoletes: > rubygem(right_http_connection)". Latter is virtual provides. > > * Weird obsoletes (broken) > "krb5-server" has "Obsoletes: krb5-server-1.14.3-8.fc26.i686". > Basically it will not obsolete anything because it's threated as > package name (and we definitely don't have such package name). > > * >/>= Obsoletes > "vdsm" has "Obsoletes: vdsm-infra >= 4.16.0". It's almost same as > unversioned Obsoletes. So it must not be used. > > Table of affected packages/maintainers: > https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/broken-obsoletes/2016-09-02/broken-obsoletes.txt > -- > -Igor Gnatenko -- -Igor Gnatenko -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
