Adam Williamson <adamw...@fedoraproject.org> writes:

> There are currently separate updates for nss 3.33.0 and nspr 4.17.0 in
> both Fedora 26 and 27. However, nss 3.33.0 requires nspr 4.17.0.
>
> As a reminder, this is a violation of the Updates Policy:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Updating_inter-dependent_packages
>
> "When one updated package requires another (or more than one other),
> the packages should be submitted together as a single update."
>
> The problem with doing things this way is that, if the nss update
> happened to be pushed stable before the nspr update (which could easily
> happen due to human error, network issues etc. even if the maintainer
> *intends* to push them together!), the dependencies in the stable
> repository will be broken; nss will not be installable.

Thank you for the reminder; there was indeed a fuss in updating nspr/nss
this time.  I have submitted the nss updates for F27/F26 stable, after
nspr 4.17 got pushed to stable.

> On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 10:38 -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
>> On 10/12/2017 05:34 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > In this case there's an even worse consequence; if you do attempt to
>> > update to nss 3.33.0 without nspr 4.17.0 dnf will 'skip' *most* of the
>> > nss packages (as it notices that they are missing dependencies), but it
>> > *will* install nss-softokn-freebl . With this mix of packages (most of
>> > nss at 3.32.0, but nss-softokn-freebl at 3.33.0), nss and anything that
>> > depends on it just fails to work at all - e.g. curl and dnf...so that's
>> > an extremely bad outcome.
>> 
>> Then isn't this a packaging bug?  They currently use ">=" requirements,
>> but if a greater version doesn't work, shouldn't they be "="?
>
> Well, there's *additionally* probably a packaging bug, yeah: nss-
> softokn-freebl should be more strictly tied to the other packages.

I still don't figure out why this causes a problem.  nss-softokn-freebl
is parallel installable with older nss* packages and that could run into
a problem if nss-softokn-freebl used a new symbol from a newer nspr.
However, as far as I know nspr 4.17 doesn't add any new symbol so it's
shouldn't be a problem at least in this case.

Regards,
-- 
Daiki Ueno
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to