On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 18:02 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 31.01.2013 17:56, schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net>
wrote:
>> Am 31.01.2013 17:43, schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:37 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
>>> <johannbg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 01/31/2013 04:38 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>>>> That would be the default between MariaDB and Mysql. Which are (at
>>>>> least for now mostly) compatible. So, if a package can use that
>>>>> interface, we prefer them to use MariaDB. They can't use both at
the
>>>>> same time.
>>>>
>>>> Which fesco members is going to handle those changes?
>>>
>>> The MariaDB feature includes using provides/obsoletes on the
"mysql"
>>> names, so the transition should be automatic for most packages.
>>
>> with provides/obsoletes it would be IMPOSSIBLE to install mysql
>> because ANY update to the mariadb package would replace it
>
> Incorrect. Feel free to read the FESCo meeting log for details
i do not need to read any theory
and why have you stripped the relevant part below?
Obsoletes: dovecot-mysql
Provides: dovecot-mysql
was used by me two days ago for my private dovecot-builds to
no longer spilt out "dovecot-mysql" to a seperate apckage as
the fedora one does
I haven't read the FESCo logs, but here's the obvious thing you're
missing: you're only considering *unversioned* obsoletes. Consider this
(version numbers are simplified as this is just an example):
F18 contains mysql-5.0.0-1.fc18
F19 contains mysql-5.0.0-2.fc19 and mariadb-1.0-1.fc19
mariadb-1.0-1.fc19 can have this:
Obsoletes: mysql < 5.0.0-2.fc19
Provides: mysql
I believe this would result in mysql being replaced with mariadb on
upgrade from F18 to F19, but mysql-5.0.0-2.fc19 still being installable.
I'll take a guess that may have been what was in the FESCo log. We'd
have to ensure the F18 package's version never exceeded the F19 mariadb
package's Obsoletes: threshold, of course, but that's not an
insurmountable barrier if you plan for it.
I believe the packaging guidelines recommend that Obsoletes be versioned
and discourage them being unversioned - precisely to allow for the
'resurrection' of the obsoleted package in future, if it seems
advisable. This is really just a planned, very short term version of
that.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net