Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:48:50 +0100
"Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=147396
>
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=147398&name=root.log
>
> This is plain weird. It seems to me that someone could create a
> package with a bogus "Provides: glibc" which was otherwise
> uninstallable and bring the whole distribution to a halt. Is there
> not a way to say "I do _not_ want this package, whatever that package
> may claim about its provides"?
I think what might be best here is to just untag the improperly built
package, and replacing it with an older version. Can you send mail to
'rel-eng(a)fedoraproject.org' with what build needs to "go away" and
which build should take it's place? It's just a simple case of
buildroot maintenance.
I think the easiest thing is going to be if rel-eng could just delete
ocaml-lablgl & ocaml-lablgl-devel from the buildroot (and any
dependencies: possibly ocaml-lablgtk, freetennis if they are there too).
The ocaml-lablgl package which is in there at the moment has a
collection of bogus "Provides" which are actually provided by the base
ocaml-runtime package. AIUI because strlen ("ocaml-labgl") < strlen
("ocaml-runtime"), the bogus package "wins".
That will allow me to rebuild all the other ocaml packages, which have
been failing for over a week now, and then we can look at why it was
that ocaml-lablgl got the wrong "Provides". There must be a problem
with the custom ocaml-find-provides.sh script that we use, but to be
honest I've never seen it fail this way at any other time so I'm not
sure what happened.
Rich.
--
Emerging Technologies, Red Hat -
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in
England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903