https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=223891 andreas.hanke@gmx-topmail.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | ------- Comment #13 from andreas.hanke@gmx-topmail.de 2006-11-28 06:46 MST ------- It's still not consistent this way. What about the following points: 1. mozilla-xulrunner181-devel (delete) Obsoletes: mozilla-xulrunner (unless you can explain why this has been added in the first place) Why should the -devel package obsolete the old runtime package? It doesn't look correct. (I won't complain that if this stays, but it looks wrong. mozilla-xulrunner is obsoleted by mozilla-xulrunner181 and not by its -devel package. mozilla-xulrunner181-devel does not have the same meaning as mozilla-xulrunner, but packages should only be obsoleted by another package if it has the same meaning.) 2. mozilla-xulrunner181-devel (add) Provides: gecko-sdk (technically not accurate, needed for the upgrade path) With the Obsoletes left in, but without a Provides added next to it, you would still get gecko-sdk flagged as upgrade problem by YaST when trying a 10.1 -> 10.2 upgrade on a system that had gecko-sdk installed because 10.1 had its gecko development environment in a package named gecko-sdk, now called/superseded by mozilla-xulrunner$VERSION-devel. (I'm unsure whether the solution is accurate in general - it's like saying "libc.so.5 provides libc.so.6", just less obvious - but _if_ this solution is preferred, it should be implemented in a consistent way.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.