Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-18 Thread Panu Matilainen
On 02/17/2014 07:02 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:56:14AM +, Joe Orton wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:37:53PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: I don't think this calls for a mass rebuild or any kind of a rebuild actually, nor should it be rawhide only. AFAIU this

rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Reindl Harald
are such changes allowed within a stable release? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065563 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct:

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Remi Collet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 17/02/2014 10:24, Reindl Harald a écrit : are such changes allowed within a stable release? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065563 As lot of package are using a bad virtual provides / requires with a double dash in EVR, and as a

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 17/02/2014 10:24, Reindl Harald a écrit : are such changes allowed within a stable release? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065563 As lot of package

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 17.02.2014 11:37, schrieb Ville Skyttä: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 17/02/2014 10:24, Reindl Harald a écrit : are such changes allowed within a stable release?

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On 02/17/2014 11:37 AM, Ville Skyttä wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 17/02/2014 10:24, Reindl Harald a écrit : are such changes allowed within a stable release?

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Joe Orton
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:37:53PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: I don't think this calls for a mass rebuild or any kind of a rebuild actually, nor should it be rawhide only. AFAIU this doesn't affect runtime at all, only build time, and affected packages can be just fixed at the same time if

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Toshio Kuratomi
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 10:56:14AM +, Joe Orton wrote: On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:37:53PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: I don't think this calls for a mass rebuild or any kind of a rebuild actually, nor should it be rawhide only. AFAIU this doesn't affect runtime at all, only build time,

Re: rpm bug 1065563 affecting httpd / php packages

2014-02-17 Thread Remi Collet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Le 17/02/2014 18:02, Toshio Kuratomi a écrit : I think this depends on what rpm and yum are currently doing with the dependencies. As Panu says here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065563#c1 if - is used in version or release then