Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (140 mails)

["Dominique Leuenberger" <Dominique.Leuenberger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

> > > On 2/22/2008 at 22:11, Petr Cerny <pcerny@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not sure whether this hasn't been discussed here a while ago, yet 
> I'm running into it more and more often lately: as libraries packages 
> are renamed according to shlib policy, they do not provide older names, 
> which makes some software uninstallable (especially with the latest 
> libzypp based tools). Typical example of this is:
>
> libfoo -> libfoo1 which doesn't provide "libfoo" (only "libfoo1" as it's 
> its name). When other package Requires: "libfoo", the package manager 
> (and eventually the user) gets fooled and isn't able to install the 
> desired package.

I actually think that a package that explicitly Requires: libfoo should be 
verified. Why not use the symbolic file requires, but always point on a 
package? This is to restrictive in my opinion and causes to much trouble where 
it's not needed.

I can think of only very very few packages where I ever Requires: <a specific 
package>... but really never did I have a Requires: for a shared library 
package in my spec files.

Dominique

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx