[Fedora-packaging] erroneous provides

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Sat Jan 27 03:28:31 UTC 2007

On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 10:29 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> To justify the time I invested in this excercise, I filed bugs for a few
> of the more obviously wrong cases:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224569
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224571
IMO, these are different cases, with similar symptoms, but with
different causes than the "bogus DSO/shared lib 'Provides'".

I think,
1. The "<lib>.so provides" should be tied to "ld.so's library search
2. The "perl() provides" (BZ 224569) should be tied to Perl's "module

3. BZ 224571 sounds like a bug in rpm's perl-reqprov filtering (Which is
known to be pretty underdeveloped/immature and to quite frequently
generate bogus/missing provide/requires)

I know, many people will disagree, but IMO, 1+2 would not be an issue if
rpm was using absolute filenames to DSO's/modules instead of virtual

> So, how does this list like the idea of adding a bulletpoint for
> "sane provides" to the package review guidelines ?
Could you elaborate? I don't understand.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list