>> Eventually we came to the following conclusion:
>> - removing "Provides: automake" from automake1.7 (my preference) was
>> not  prefered;

> In my not so humble opinion, no package should ever require automake
> without indicating the version. In current way "foobar: BuildRequires
> automake" is just asking for trouble. Packagers are freely asking
> other versions of automake to overwrite the stock files in tarball. (And
> the version is dependent on which machine the package is built -- say,
> automake1.7 in machine A, automake1.6 in B, automake1.4 in C)

I would like automake-1.4 to be renamed to automake1.4. This would make
this possible.

>> - using "automake1.7" to fill in the "Requires automake" in rpmbuild
>> (instead of automake) isn't a good idea, since it pulls in
>> autoconf2.5.  This will impact packages that "BuildRequires:
>> autoconf2.5" when  building with automake1.4;

> Hardcode rpmbuild and use automake1.7 to replace "Requires
> automake" !?!?

Just de-install automake-1.4 and install automake1.7

>> - automake-1.4 is not exactly the same as automake1.7 (so perhaps it
>> shouldn't Provide automake after all?). Some packages that work with
>> automake-1.4 may not work with automake1.7, however, we don't know
>> _what_ will be impacted.

> That's my suggestion; no automake* package should ever "Provides
> automake", and no other packages should "Requires automake". They should
> "Requires automake1.4" or "Requires automake1.7" (or 1.6) instead. Then
> fix all spec files that need to execute automake.

I think I like this. This will then also enable us to choose one specific
"standard" version which rpm-build Requires. (automake[1.4|1.6|1.7]).

> Just a suggestion anyway, though I've been suggesting this since
> automake 1.4p6 tarball is released. :-(

Sorry... missed that one :-/

>> anyway... that's the status. we're letting things be as they are for
>> now. I guess automake-1.4 is considered the standard.

> While all of the world is slowly moving away from automake 1.4. :-(
Is it time to change?

Whatever happens, I'd prefer that rpm-build will require one specific
version, just to be clear on what the standard is.

Stefan



Reply via email to