http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=952855
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=952855#c44
Dominique Leuenberger
Comment 42:
Is it possible to use this mechanism for online update?
In our case, it should not be weakremover, but better full Obsoletes.
Here is the list of no more existing sub-packages that existed in past:
translation-update-ca@valencia should be obsoleted by translation-update-caValencia (package names no longer allow "@")
That needs to be by the translation-update-cavalencia package itself (so in the .spec file) - online updates can carry this logic
translation-update-ka should be obsoleted with no replacement
That one is trickier - 'something' needs to obsolete it once it was shipped in the release. The best course might be a package with only a readme, stating that this package is left intentionally empty. triggering removal of the package is not going to work at this stage.
translation-update-sr@latin should be obsoleted by translation-update-srLatin (package names no longer allow "@")
Same as for ca@valencia
translation-update-wa should be obsoleted with no replacement
same as for -ka
For Tumbleweed, translation-update makes nearly no sense, and we want it empty all the time. (And obsolete all sub-packages.)
If it does not create sub-packages, openSUSE-release will add this to the weakremoved list for TW - there, we expect users to do 'zypper dup' - every snaopshot is a 'new release' - and we are less bound.
Next time, the update and filling the package with a real contents needs to be done after split of release branch.
Next one will be 42.2 - this definitively needs better handling that time around. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.