On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 19:19 +0200, Jakub Filak wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-08 at 17:47 +0200, Martin Milata wrote:
Signed-off-by: Martin Milata mmilata@redhat.com
libreport.spec.in | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libreport.spec.in b/libreport.spec.in index ba3465b..f6a6a76 100644 --- a/libreport.spec.in +++ b/libreport.spec.in @@ -40,12 +40,10 @@ BuildRequires: asciidoc BuildRequires: xmlto BuildRequires: newt-devel BuildRequires: libproxy-devel -BuildRequires: btparser-devel +BuildRequires: satyr-devel
Shouldn't we restrict satyr version somehow? Perhaps like we require libreport package in abrt spec file?
I propose these changes: Requires: satyr >= 0.4 BuildRequires: satyr-devel >= 0.4
If you agree, I will commit the proposed changed.
OK, 'Requires: satyr >= 0.4' is not necessary because rpmbuild automatically adds a dependency on libsatyr.so.1()(64bit) to all packages which needs it. But satyr's soversion is out of date and doesn't reflect changes in ABI between 0.3 version and 0.4 version. So, I'll add the require line and we can remove it once satyr starts correct soversioning.
%if %{with bugzilla} BuildRequires: xmlrpc-c-devel %endif -##satyr migration: -#BuildRequires: satyr-devel BuildRequires: doxygen Requires: libreport-filesystem = %{version}-%{release} # required for update from old report library, otherwise we obsolete report-gtk