MariaDB replacing MySQL [was Re: Should MariaDB touch my.cnf in %post?]

[Jan Zelený]

On 5. 3. 2013 at 19:14:25, Honza Horak wrote:
> On 03/05/2013 11:07 AM, Norvald H. Ryeng wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:17:00 +0100, Tom Lane <tgl at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> The way this worked in the past (and still does on RHEL and some other
> >> distros) is that MySQL AB provided RPMs named "MySQL", "MySQL-server",
> >> etc, which simply conflicted with the Red Hat-supplied packages named
> >> "mysql", "mysql-server", etc.  Perhaps it would be best to continue that
> >> naming tradition, ie establish a new Oracle-maintained Fedora package
> >> named "MySQL", instead of figuring out how to transition maintainership
> >> of the "mysql" packages.  This would give us some more wiggle room about
> >> managing the transition --- in particular, it's hard to see how we
> >> manage Obsoletes/Provides linkages in any sane fashion if the "mysql"
> >> package name continues in use.  I think we're going to have to end up
> >> with a design in which "mysql" becomes essentially a virtual Provides
> >> name.
> > 
> > We now have a set of working 5.6.10 packages. The packages pass mtr
> > tests and we've tested some of the packages that depend on MySQL (php,
> > perl-DBD-MySQL, etc.). It all seems to be working well, so I think we're
> > ready to get it into rawhide. I believe Bjørn Munch has already
> > contacted you about how to upload, etc.
> 
> I'm glad to hear that things get move on with MySQL-5.6 effort.
> 
> > We've kept the existing package names. I don't understand the reasons
> > behind the name change you suggest. Honza Horák has added a real-mysql
> > virtual provides, and this is provided by the existing mysql and mariadb
> > packages, so it seems the infrastructure you suggest is already in
> > place. Our 5.6.10 packages are just an upgrade of the existing mysql
> > packages, so I see no need for a name change, and a change now would
> > break upgrades for users that already have the mysql packages installed.
> 
> We're still going to make mariadb the default in F19 as proposed in the
> Feature page. Since depended packages are now built against
> libmysqlclient.so from mariadb, we should really ensure mariadb package
> will be installed (if not explicitly requested otherwise by users),
> because MySQL lacks some client side features that mariadb adds -- so
> keeping MySQL installed would introduce potential compatibility problems.
> 
> About the issues with the current way how the things are handling -- we
> introduced real-mysql virtual provides to distinguish between mysql
> package and mysql virtual name -- that doesn't work well in all aspects,
> it is not very clean and it also brings ambiguities.
> 
> We decided to solve that as proposed above -- to introduce a new package
> MySQL (dist-git already done) where original MySQL project will be kept
> and eventually upgraded to 5.6 by contributors from Oracle.
> 
> Package mysql will be retired as of F19 and the name "mysql" will exist
> only as a virtual provide for compatibility reasons. mariadb will
> provide "mysql" names, while MySQL won't -- ideally both packages could
> provide it but RPM cannot define a priority for preferring one of two
> packages that provide the same symbol. Is that right, Jan or Ales? Or
> anything changed in that field?

Nothing has changed in this area - there are some heuristics used, I think the 
most used one is to pick the package with the shortest name ;-) I'm now 
pushing for proper support of versioning in provides, that might help you. But 
even if we decide to support it, we are still looking on a time frame of at 
least a month or so.

> So, the current plan with a new MySQL package will result in much more
> cleaner solution and should avoid ambiguities.
> 
> Regards,
> Honza
> 
> Note: In case there are some reactions, I'd like to excuse myself that
> I'll be off-line for a few days now and won't be able to respond until
> Monday.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130306/a84dc3ef/attachment.sig>