[Pulp-list] Package pulp is obsoleted by pulp-server error

Jay Dobies jason.dobies at redhat.com
Mon Jul 16 14:01:04 UTC 2012

On 07/16/2012 09:46 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 09:08:22AM -0400, Jay Dobies wrote:
>> I'd rather not. It'll require us to make the spec entry but more
>> importantly is confusing as we try to migrate people towards the v2
>> way of thinking about things. Even if I did add it, it would refer
>> to the platform itself which is still not really what you want, you
>> want the RPM support on top of that.
>> I'm not sure how much it gets you either. You'll have to change APIs
>> to use v2 so you'll have to hack up code as it is. I would guess
>> (but I could be wrong on this) that changing the spec at the same
>> time will be one of the easier changes you'll need to make.
> Well, my intention is based on this document
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
> I would expect you want the new package to be transparent to end users.
> And since this breaks also our nightly builds, it would be great adding
> it for us. We are those users as well :-) We are not there (Pulp V2 API)
> yet, but I still wan't the installer to be working.
> I am not sure upgrade of Katello will be even possible without this (I
> mean CFSE v1.0 -> CFSE vNEXT). I just can't tell you what is the reason
> for having this in Fedora Packaging Guidelines, I admit.
>>> Provides: oldpackagename = $provEVR
>>> Obsoletes: oldpackagename < $obsEVR

I'll get someone to look into the provides clause. We know we need to 
have an upgrade path for CFSE but it's not being worked on currently.

Jay Dobies
Freenode: jdob @ #pulp
http://pulpproject.org | http://blog.pulpproject.org

More information about the Pulp-list mailing list