Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

Dne 04. 06. 20 v 11:25 Igor Raits napsal(a): > On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 10:56 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 03. 06. 20 v 19:29 Igor Raits napsal(a): > >> On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >>> Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. > >>> Not > >>>

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 10:56 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Dne 03. 06. 20 v 19:29 Igor Raits napsal(a): > > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. > > > Not > > > sure

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

Dne 03. 06. 20 v 19:29 Igor Raits napsal(a): > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not > > sure > > if that would be better. Or is there already some functionality which > > would exclude the package from dnf

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 07:29:54PM +0200, Igor Raits wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not > > sure > > if that would be better. Or is there

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Wed, 2020-06-03 at 18:42 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not > sure > if that would be better. Or is there already some functionality which > would exclude the package from dnf

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

Other possibility is to modify DNF to not touch such packages. Not sure if that would be better. Or is there already some functionality which would exclude the package from dnf transaction, something like: ~~~ # This package won't be installed, but will obsolete other packages Provides:

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

Because was bitten by this and there is not clear guideline, I have tried to draft something here: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/988 Vít Dne 03. 05. 18 v 12:10 Daniel P. Berrangé napsal(a): > In libvirt we recently deleted a driver for the legacy Xen toolstack. > > This

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 11:00:00AM +, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 6:10 AM Daniel P. Berrangé > wrote: > > > In libvirt we recently deleted a driver for the legacy Xen toolstack. > > > This was shipped in a libvirt-daemon-driver-xen RPM. > > > I am able

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 6:10 AM Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > In libvirt we recently deleted a driver for the legacy Xen toolstack. > This was shipped in a libvirt-daemon-driver-xen RPM. > I am able to add an "Obsoletes: libvirt-daemon-driver-xen < 4.3.0" > line to the

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

> "DPB" == Daniel P Berrangé writes: DPB> How can I get the auto-generated DPB> libvirt-daemon-driver-libxl-debuginfo RPM to have an "Obsoletes: DPB> libvirt-daemon-driver-xen-debuginfo < 4.3.0" statement ? It seems DPB> impossible, meaning users with debuginfo have a

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

On 3.5.2018 12:17, Miro Hrončok wrote: Last time I've asked it was impossible. See https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packag...@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4PMKPOOWEZR7EWJCQ6XHLPQ6IKIHQPJ7/ Sorry, the link should have been:

Re: Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

On 3.5.2018 12:10, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote> How can I get the auto-generated libvirt-daemon-driver-libxl-debuginfo RPM to have an "Obsoletes: libvirt-daemon-driver-xen-debuginfo < 4.3.0" statement ? It seems impossible, meaning users with debuginfo have a broken upgrade path. An unfortunate

Adding Obsoletes to generated -debuginfo packages ?

In libvirt we recently deleted a driver for the legacy Xen toolstack. This was shipped in a libvirt-daemon-driver-xen RPM. I am able to add an "Obsoletes: libvirt-daemon-driver-xen < 4.3.0" line to the libvirt-daemon-driver-libxl RPM, which gives clean upgrade path for users. If they have the