rawhide report: 20140113 changes

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 10:19 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:50:37 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2014-01-13 at 14:29 +0000, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote:
> > > [obexfs]
> > >         obexfs-0.12-7.fc20.i686 requires libopenobex.so.1
> > 
> > So, this is orphaned, and the code has now actually been rolled into
> > obexftp upstream. The build of obexftp I did yesterday includes the
> > obexfs and obexautofs utilities.
> > 
> > What's the appropriate move here? Can we just add obsoletes/provides to
> > the obexftp package and then request that obexfs be retired?
> 
> Alternatively, an "obexfs" subpackage could be built. Depending on how
> optional these tools are. 
> 
> As you say, it includes the same tools (obexfs, obexautofs). Do those
> tools do the same thing, or do they only use the same names? There are
> no manual pages for them.
> 
>   Information for RPM obexfs-0.12-7.fc20.x86_64.rpm
>   http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=4254360
> 
>   Information for RPM obexftp-0.24-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
>   http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=4734383
> 
> obexftp contains the same Requires except for libpthread (obexfs depends
> on libphread). There's an empty /usr/share/doc/obexftp/html included.

They're the same tools, the obefxs source was moved into the obexftp
source tree upstream.

The thing I was unsure about was dealing with obsoleting an orphaned
package. Do I have to adopt the orphaned package first? Or can I just
file a request to kill that package?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net