http://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1169661 Bug ID: 1169661 Summary: barrier isn't compatible with synergy Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: X11 Applications Assignee: screening-team-bugs@suse.de Reporter: martin.wilck@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- I am happy that barrier is part of TW. But it should not set "Obsoletes" and "Provides" tags for synergy.
From barrier changelog:
------------------------------------------------------------------- Tue Apr 7 08:10:04 UTC 2020 - Tomáš Chvátal <tchvatal@suse.com> - Drop SUSE Firewall declarations - Do not use service but just utilize the download URL - Provide and obsolete synergy as we actual fork of it The last change causes synergy to be automatically deinstalled on all TW systems. This was a disruprtive move for environments where not all clients and servers can be changed to use barrier. The barrier protocol is incompatible with the synergy protocol. This is independent of encryption; it's simply due to differen "Hello" strings used in the protocol. Log snippets from synergy server and barrier client, without encryption:
cat /tmp/server.txt [2020-04-16T14:15:27] NOTE: new client disconnected [2020-04-16T14:15:28] NOTE: accepted client connection [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG1: saying hello [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG2: writef(Synergy%2i%2i) [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG2: wrote 11 bytes [2020-04-16T14:15:28] NOTE: new client disconnected
cat /tmp/client.txt [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG: Opening new socket: 4D8980F0 [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG1: connecting to server [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG1: connected; wait for hello [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG2: readf(Barrier%2i%2i) [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG2: readf: format mismatch: B vs S [2020-04-16T14:15:28] DEBUG: Closing socket: 4D8980F0
It can be seen that the client read "Synergy" while expecting "Barrier", and disconnected. There's no reason for the "Obsoletes:" tag. In fact, synergy and barrier can be nicely installed on one system at the same time, so we don't even need "Conflicts:". You just can't *run* both synergys and barriers in parallel (it might even be possible to run both on different ports, but I doubt it would work, at least not in the same graphical session). There's even less reason for the "Provides:" tag, because barrier does *not* provide a replacement for synergy, see above. For the time being, it should be up to admins whether they want to use one or the other. We can't expect people to migrate a whole data center (or home office, for that matter) just because of a single TW system being updated. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.