From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "James Bowes" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make the git metapackage require the same version of the subpackages. Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:13:26 -0500 Message-ID: <3f80363f0801061313o514fa01bje354503483db47ab@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080106173501.GB9349@spitfire> <7vprwe4s8e.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Junio C Hamano" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jan 06 22:14:02 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JBcoi-0000YL-0c for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:14:00 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753226AbYAFVNb (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:13:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753192AbYAFVNa (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:13:30 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.182]:32573 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753109AbYAFVNa (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:13:30 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u52so12209451pyb.10 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:13:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=VTujILDCKqD9rltvrebQjGN4reWdKYc9MyT2HAqkV+Q=; b=c7fdSQ60W4K1DWkSdI/KK9aHs3+NacaUZa4Z6PmMfaHbW6yBIMvoD0d09Zh2uWoocj4s0l2pX7jlb7ERCNt6L+D2JbKc1rubH031hJI0lYBTd3+LMIva5P5GI1h60H+Xe+BBOMa+wF6MqjZzL3IwiJAdD6NTXdd+u1vGcKWXvfM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=r86FFJdWLPfMvj1mtarPWvhe4esCcVpD1Jpd1OJwzCbEy2DgU++fN+jiDbooCkVufpEf4Z/LTaqCWs/MgMDOm6+WZhX/cPnqxHQuwnPfcR6BgF8SWpj7/p94D/eDAGbQFJ2ltdI3xlHQAmuKOHq6lqupv8NKtFAIN1YMOn7cWzc= Received: by 10.65.115.4 with SMTP id s4mr17361901qbm.47.1199654006833; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:13:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.149.10 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:13:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7vprwe4s8e.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Content-Disposition: inline X-Google-Sender-Auth: 8ec8f169c5ae18de Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Jan 6, 2008 3:24 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > James Bowes writes: > > > Without explicit version deps in the rpm spec file, 'yum update git' > > effectively does nothing. Require explicit versions of the subpackages, so that > > they get pulled in on an update. > > > > Signed-off-by: James Bowes > > I am asking as an RPM illiterate, not questioning the validity > of what your patch does. > > The approach your patch takes feels like the right way we should > have taken from the beginning. Does this supersede the "fix" in > 5587cac28be66acf5edc2a4b83b67c8cfffbc5e9 (GIT 1.5.3.1: obsolete > git-p4 in RPM spec file)? IOW, if we had Requires for the same > version from the beginning, we wouldn't have had the problem > when we dropped git-p4 package? I believe the obsolete is still needed, as you'd need a way to tell rpm to just get rid of git-p4 entirely. -James