firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64 conflicts with pkgconfig(nspr) >= 4.16

[Dridi Boukelmoune]

Hello,

For some reason I fail to understand, a non-devel package is
conflicting with a devel package :-/

According to dnf it's the only explicit conflict for the package:

    $ dnf repoquery --conflicts firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64
    pkgconfig(nspr) >= 4.16

Maybe someone confused Conflicts with BuildConflicts in the spec?

Dridi

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 24.8.2017 v 16:46 Dridi Boukelmoune napsal(a):
>  Hello,
>  
>  For some reason I fail to understand, a non-devel package is
>  conflicting with a devel package :-/
>  
>  According to dnf it's the only explicit conflict for the package:
>  
>       $ dnf repoquery --conflicts firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64
>       pkgconfig(nspr) >= 4.16
>  
>  Maybe someone confused Conflicts with BuildConflicts in the spec? 
Because there are several ways how to resolve the dependency and DNF chose from them one
which is confusing for humans:
See
   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485881
Already


Mirek

[Martin Stransky]

On 08/24/2017 04:46 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
>  Hello,
>  
>  For some reason I fail to understand, a non-devel package is
>  conflicting with a devel package :-/
>  
>  According to dnf it's the only explicit conflict for the package:
>  
>       $ dnf repoquery --conflicts firefox-55.0.2-2.fc26.x86_64
>       pkgconfig(nspr) >= 4.16
>  
>  Maybe someone confused Conflicts with BuildConflicts in the spec? 
You're right, I confused the Conflicts with BuildConflicts (didn't 
actually know that there's BuildConflicts). See 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1484345#c11

ma.

[Dridi Boukelmoune]

Hello,

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
<snip>
>  Because there are several ways how to resolve the dependency and DNF
> chose
>  from them one which is confusing for humans:
>  See
>    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485881
>  Already 
Non-optimal resolution is one problem, but not the reason why I
brought this to the devel list instead of filing a bug. But this is
interesting to know, thanks!

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Martin Stransky <stransky(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 08/24/2017 04:46 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: 
<snip>
> > Maybe someone confused Conflicts with BuildConflicts in the
> spec?
>
>
>  You're right, I confused the Conflicts with BuildConflicts (didn't actually
>  know that there's BuildConflicts). See
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1484345#c11 
OK, so this was not on purpose :)

The problem I had was that nspr-devel installed prevented an upgrade
of the nss package. Spurious blocking of nss updates is a red flag for
me, and I'm wondering whether the tooling could catch that sort of
things. Mainly, disapprove "normal" packages that conflict with devel
packages (or for that matter other kinds of special packages like
debuginfo).

I don't think rpmlint would be a good candidate, because with a
virtual provide like pkgconfig(nspr) it's not obvious it will resolve
to a devel package (even though to my human eyes it's definitely
screaming devel). So maybe a check could be implemented with Taskotron
or something else, packages like golang libraries (source packages)
seem to be consistently suffixed with -devel, I can't tell for other
stacks.

Are there guidelines covering that?

Dridi