I know qt 4.5 is in updates-testing repo but i have a package (scidavis) also in testing repo which needs qt 4.5. So when qt 4.5 will be in stable repo and how to know it. Thanks Eric
On Wednesday 15 April 2009 07:30:13 Eric Tanguy wrote:
I know qt 4.5 is in updates-testing repo but i have a package (scidavis) also in testing repo which needs qt 4.5. So when qt 4.5 will be in stable repo and how to know it.
Hi Eric, Qt 4.5 will be probably in stable early next week, together with KDE 4.2.2 but first we need some feedback and there are still some issues with 4.5 compatibility.
For Fedora KDE related discussion it's better to use fedora- kde@lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list. Follow this mailing list to know time of push to stable. Or we can add your package to our big stable push group.
Jaroslav
Thanks Eric
Jaroslav Reznik a écrit :
On Wednesday 15 April 2009 07:30:13 Eric Tanguy wrote:
I know qt 4.5 is in updates-testing repo but i have a package (scidavis) also in testing repo which needs qt 4.5. So when qt 4.5 will be in stable repo and how to know it.
Hi Eric, Qt 4.5 will be probably in stable early next week, together with KDE 4.2.2 but first we need some feedback and there are still some issues with 4.5 compatibility.
For Fedora KDE related discussion it's better to use fedora- kde@lists.fedoraproject.org mailing list. Follow this mailing list to know time of push to stable. Or we can add your package to our big stable push group.
Jaroslav
Thanks Eric
Ok thank you. Could you add scidavis package to your stable push group ? Eric
Eric Tanguy wrote:
Ok thank you. Could you add scidavis package to your stable push group ?
Hmmm, well, the problem is that if we want to add the package to our update group, the separate update would need to be deleted first. We can't have 2 update requests for the same package.
Kevin Kofler
On Wednesday 15 April 2009 12:26:40 Kevin Kofler wrote:
Eric Tanguy wrote:
Ok thank you. Could you add scidavis package to your stable push group ?
Hmmm, well, the problem is that if we want to add the package to our update group, the separate update would need to be deleted first. We can't have 2 update requests for the same package.
It should obsolete the first one, shouldn't it?
I don't like this updates-testing schizophrenia...
Jaroslav
Kevin Kofler
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 14:03 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
It should obsolete the first one, shouldn't it?
Does obsoletion also work if the EVR is the same? I'd expect it to only work if the EVR is newer.
No, it works like Requires or Provides or anything else. If you don't version the obsolete it will obsolete any package of this name. So foobar-1.0-1fc11 with a line:
Obsoletes: oldfoo
will obsolete oldfoo-2.0-1fc11, or oldfoo-1.0-15fc11, or oldfoo- *anything*.
That's why obsoletes ought to be versioned (something like Obsoletes: oldfoo < 1.0-1), so that they don't come back to bite you in future - for instance, if the name changes back.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Adam Williamson awilliam@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 14:03 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
It should obsolete the first one, shouldn't it?
Does obsoletion also work if the EVR is the same? I'd expect it to only work if the EVR is newer.
No, it works like Requires or Provides or anything else. If you don't version the obsolete it will obsolete any package of this name. So foobar-1.0-1fc11 with a line:
Obsoletes: oldfoo
will obsolete oldfoo-2.0-1fc11, or oldfoo-1.0-15fc11, or oldfoo- *anything*.
That's why obsoletes ought to be versioned (something like Obsoletes: oldfoo < 1.0-1), so that they don't come back to bite you in future - for instance, if the name changes back.
They are talking about an update obsoletes and older one in bodhi. Not package obsoletes an other package.
Well deleting the old update and adding it to the new group should work.
On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 23:43 +0200, drago01 wrote:
They are talking about an update obsoletes and older one in bodhi. Not package obsoletes an other package.
Well deleting the old update and adding it to the new group should work.
Oh, sorry, thanks for the clarification - didn't catch that.
Adam Williamson wrote:
No, it works like Requires or Provides or anything else. If you don't version the obsolete it will obsolete any package of this name. So foobar-1.0-1fc11 with a line:
Obsoletes: oldfoo
will obsolete oldfoo-2.0-1fc11, or oldfoo-1.0-15fc11, or oldfoo- *anything*.
That's why obsoletes ought to be versioned (something like Obsoletes: oldfoo < 1.0-1), so that they don't come back to bite you in future - for instance, if the name changes back.
I'm talking about Bodhi's obsoletion of updates, which has basically nothing to do with the Obsoletes: tag. I know how the Obsoletes: tag works.
Kevin Kofler