[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: rpms/fence-agents/F-11 fence-agents.spec,1.13,1.14

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:51:14 +0000 (UTC), Fabio wrote:
>> Author: fabbione
>> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/fence-agents/F-11
>> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv15209
>> Modified Files:
>> 	fence-agents.spec 
>> Log Message:
>> Fix Requires: on libvirt/libvirt-client
>> +%if 0%{?fedora} >= 12
>> +Requires: libvirt-client
>> +%else
>> +Requires: libvirt
>> +%endif
>> +
> What is this explicit dependency on a package name supposed to achieve?

> There is the automatic arch-specific dependency on the libvirt SONAME
> already, and it is tons better than a non-arch-specific and version-less
> dependency on a package name.

The dependency on the library is pulled in via fence_xvmd that might or
might be not build (depending on ./configure invocation).

virsh used to be part of libvirt in any release before F12. It´s now
moved to libvirt-client.

So while rpm resolver does the right thing for fence_xvmd and pulls in
the right soname Requires, it cannot detect the usage of virsh within

If there are better ways to handle it, I am absolutely happy to change
the spec file but I don´t think it is correct either to break
fence_virsh because somebody is not building fence_xvmd* (that is going
to be deprecated upstream btw in not too long future).

I also considered a specific file Requires: /usr/bin/virsh, but policy
suggests to avoid that for different reasons.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]