rpm AutoRequires/AutoProvides and dsos not in linker path, do we care ?

[Chris Weyl]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Caolán McNamara <caolanm at redhat.com> wrote:

> So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502226 was logged a
> while ago against OOo for the rpms "improperly" providing and
> requiring .sos that are not in the linker path, but instead in OOo's own
> subdirs.
>

As others have mentioned, we run into this with Perl arch-specific packages
quite a bit; it's hardly unique to Perl, however.  I have a packaging
guideline up before the FPC as to how to handle these in a sane, consistent
manner:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering

Ville was kind enough to cite this guideline's alternate incarnation as a
feature, as well as the thread over on the packaging list about all this
(citing here just for completeness):

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.extras.packaging/5854
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/BetterRpmAutoReqProvFiltering

I'd hoped this would be discussed again at yesterdays FPC meeting, but there
didn't seem to be one... (Right?)

                              -Chris
-- 
Chris Weyl
Ex astris, scientia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090617/db4e540a/attachment.htm>