Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (142 mails)

[Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@xxxxxxxxx>]

I'm attempting my first package update and it got rejected.

I don't understand some of Coolo's statements, so I'm hoping for
clarification from the experts here.

See interspersed:


---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From:  <coolo@xxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:23 AM
> > Subject: [obs submit-request 92004] openSUSE:Factory/perl-Image-ExifTool: 
> > declined by coolo
> > To: Greg.Freemyer@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > State of submit-request #92004 was changed by coolo:
> >
> >  review -> declined
> >
> > Comment:
> >  do not require package names, but require perl(IO::Compress) - and wait for 
> > it to land in Factory (I just submitted it).

I understand that part.

> > And add provides/obsoletes for exiftool in there - and add a deleterequest 
> > for it. We don't need the tool twice in factory

This has me lost.  perl-Image-ExifTool v8.40 is already in factory.
I'm just upgrading it to 8.65.  Admittedly there is a new executable
(/usr/bin/exiftool) that was not there before.

I can add a provides statement easily enough, but why do I need a
obsoletes and why do I need a deleterequest.  I'm just trying to
update an existing perl package (devel:languages:perl /
perl-Image-ExifTool).

> > https://build.opensuse.org/request/diff/92004
> >
> > Source
> >  project:  devel:languages:perl
> >  package:  perl-Image-ExifTool
> >  revision: 5
> >
> > Target:
> >  project: openSUSE:Factory
> >  package: perl-Image-ExifTool

Greg
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx