On 09/02/2016 12:54 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote: > Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 09/02/2016 07:14 AM, Igor Gnatenko wrote: >>> >>> * 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). >> >> This definitely looks odd... Robbie? > > This is part of something I was requested to add (from the RHEL > packaging where we have lines like `Obsoletes: > krb5-server-1.11.3-49.el7.i686`, added by a previous maintainer) wherein > the 64-bit versions of packages need to obsolete the 32-bit versions > because we run into problems if both are installed. > > If what's in the spec file is not the correct way to accomplish that, > what is? I am unable to find documentation for any of this. >
Is that because some machines at one point did have both installed? That's kind of a mess. I'd recommend taking that discussion to packag...@lists.fedoraproject.org and see what they recommend.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
