F28 Self Contained Change: Removing ldconfig scriptlets

[Jan Kurik]

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Removing ldconfig scriptlets =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets

Change owner(s):
* Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain AT fedoraproject DOT org,>
* Neal Gompa <ngompa13 AT gmail DOT com>

For many years, package maintainers were required to write scriptlets
which call ldconfig in %post/%postun if they package shared libraries.

== Detailed Description ==
Since time immemorial, Red Hat/Fedora packagers have been required to
add a stanza to spec files for packages containing libraries to update
the ldconfig cache.

%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

To say this is annoying is to put it mildly. However, there was no
standard mechanism to make this boilerplate go away. Now with RPM
4.13+, we should change this to file triggers and make all of that go
away.

With this change, these scriptlets can be removed and ldconfig would
be run just once per transaction.

If your package places shared libraries in special locations
referenced by ld.so.conf, you still need to run ldconfig manually.

For those who concerned about whether this is self-contained or
system-wide change: there is no overhead if packagers don't remove
ldconfig scriptlets in time, so completion doesn't depend whether
packagers remove them or not. We are just making it possible.


== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
Make sure that DSO symlinks are being packagedcommit, add transaction
filetriggers to glibccommit + commit.

* Other developers:
Package maintainers are advised to remove ldconfig scriptlets in order
to achieve benefits specified above.

* Release engineering:
#7284: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7284

* List of deliverables:
N/A (not a System Wide Change)

* Policies and guidelines:
Packaging guidelines need to be updated to reflect reality.

* Trademark approval:
N/A (not needed for this Change)
-- 
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic

[Igor Gnatenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning: Thanks to Jason
Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
implementation. 

Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
%ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets.

So long story short:
* If you have %post -p /sbin/ldconfig and %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig, replace it
with %ldconfig_scriptlets
* If you have just one of those, replace it with %ldconfig_post or
%ldconfig_postun accordingly
* If you just call to /sbin/ldconfig from one of your scriptlets in shell, just
replace it with %?ldconfig

However, if you are not interested to support distro versions less than F28,
then just remove scriptlets 😉 Although on F28+, those macro expand to nothin
g so it's just matter of having 1-2 additional lines in spec file.

On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 22:30 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
>  = Proposed Self Contained Change: Removing ldconfig scriptlets =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets
>  
>  Change owner(s):
>  * Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain AT fedoraproject DOT org,>
>  * Neal Gompa <ngompa13 AT gmail DOT com>
>  
>  For many years, package maintainers were required to write scriptlets
>  which call ldconfig in %post/%postun if they package shared libraries.
>  
>  == Detailed Description ==
>  Since time immemorial, Red Hat/Fedora packagers have been required to
>  add a stanza to spec files for packages containing libraries to update
>  the ldconfig cache.
>  
>  %post -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  
>  To say this is annoying is to put it mildly. However, there was no
>  standard mechanism to make this boilerplate go away. Now with RPM
>  4.13+, we should change this to file triggers and make all of that go
>  away.
>  
>  With this change, these scriptlets can be removed and ldconfig would
>  be run just once per transaction.
>  
>  If your package places shared libraries in special locations
>  referenced by ld.so.conf, you still need to run ldconfig manually.
>  
>  For those who concerned about whether this is self-contained or
>  system-wide change: there is no overhead if packagers don't remove
>  ldconfig scriptlets in time, so completion doesn't depend whether
>  packagers remove them or not. We are just making it possible.
>  
>  
>  == Scope ==
>  * Proposal owners:
>  Make sure that DSO symlinks are being packagedcommit, add transaction
>  filetriggers to glibccommit + commit.
>  
>  * Other developers:
>  Package maintainers are advised to remove ldconfig scriptlets in order
>  to achieve benefits specified above.
>  
>  * Release engineering:
>  #7284: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7284
>  
>  * List of deliverables:
>  N/A (not a System Wide Change)
>  
>  * Policies and guidelines:
>  Packaging guidelines need to be updated to reflect reality.
>  
>  * Trademark approval:
>  N/A (not needed for this Change)
>  -- 
>  Jan Kuřík
>  Platform & Fedora Program Manager
>  Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic 
- -- 
- -Igor Gnatenko
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlpwNTAACgkQaVcUvRu8
> X0x4FRAAtGD9BxH75UYdRbSVpP9uo+rLSRd0+QZTB0b47P5+tJStDBujbiIjz1MG
> nCeYvYqXKDqVMvdhRG9X5V/XIer5Uf5FYWVhpLNB/6ssOU0xuVM7vKlMealOAYGw
> p5CtgpDF48ukmFwbIyJOwM1g/Q7hW/2lMcvvGvXBQmRNE0MeaTy5i91oVXjyZvI4
> gdK+qv79typk8//8vHOXEXKpAKBWvAjjqzfvM3h4jIveqRqnkZwDBrDuIDSmMuV3
> EbiUbkQUFBEh44TFZi5Z+vj2d0gR/apabhQvQWezVJf+FoQSaAD1saOW+aqHVOki
> IHXNB9kiyDbLHkj5pj53x6BfFkPGLxIy6jAIJlPUn6EiXtIrjhrBN/rrPlGH/iUH
> 0Xm8vA0IsQsFRbuTJWkNqjDvIlIvU7gPAsbUWFesymRj2wLEiUONy2qfPQp7TUr0
> NEhkzVP4AcKoQ16rJLmyaeixdP0E0tNqMSUrrsoETG0LvictCSyGth1KkMfoCsAp
> 5bwxIqT0z3Y3rYvyL1uIxgLdOJPXbYA28WLv5im8zNmKBd/JSQwt9uMFf2ehum2P
> 5NRDZi7eQdYsQUVsbgeRC8sKzyj0q3l1gRaN6QyfkKoSvSZ/1UQjyhfL82xJB62M
> cefA85qmjH160gG+ZrVvB5L1CM9jc2bMQHS7y9yiW4kvCL0GmAg=
> =OZ+u
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 30/01/18 10:04 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning: Thanks to Jason
> Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
> implementation.
>
> Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
> %ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets.
>
> So long story short:
> * If you have %post -p /sbin/ldconfig and %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig, replace it
> with %ldconfig_scriptlets
> * If you have just one of those, replace it with %ldconfig_post or
> %ldconfig_postun accordingly
> * If you just call to /sbin/ldconfig from one of your scriptlets in shell, just
> replace it with %?ldconfig
>
> However, if you are not interested to support distro versions less than F28,
> then just remove scriptlets 😉 Although on F28+, those macro expand to nothin
> g so it's just matter of having 1-2 additional lines in spec file. 
Is there any way to use the macros for subpackages?

The boost package has lots of subpackages that install shared libs, so
each one does:

%post foo -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun foo -p /sbin/ldconfig

%post bar -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun bar -p /sbin/ldconfig

(Although for Boost we don't have a single spec file that works for
all distro versions, so I can just remove them entirely in rawhide,
and keep them in older branches).

[Igor Gnatenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 09:49 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>  On 30/01/18 10:04 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > Hash: SHA256
>  > 
>  > For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning: Thanks to
>  > Jason
>  > Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
>  > implementation.
>  > 
>  > Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
>  > %ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets.
>  > 
>  > So long story short:
>  > * If you have %post -p /sbin/ldconfig and %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig,
>  > replace it
>  > with %ldconfig_scriptlets
>  > * If you have just one of those, replace it with %ldconfig_post or
>  > %ldconfig_postun accordingly
>  > * If you just call to /sbin/ldconfig from one of your scriptlets in shell,
>  > just
>  > replace it with %?ldconfig
>  > 
>  > However, if you are not interested to support distro versions less than
>  > F28,
>  > then just remove scriptlets 😉 Although on F28+, those macro expand t
>  > o nothin
>  > g so it's just matter of having 1-2 additional lines in spec file.
>  
>  Is there any way to use the macros for subpackages? 
Sure!

>  The boost package has lots of subpackages that install shared libs,
> so
>  each one does:
>  
>  %post foo -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  %postun foo -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  
>  %post bar -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  %postun bar -p /sbin/ldconfig 
%ldconfig_scriptlets foo
%ldconfig_scriptlets bar

>  (Although for Boost we don't have a single spec file that works
> for
>  all distro versions, so I can just remove them entirely in rawhide,
>  and keep them in older branches). 
It also accepts -n, so %ldconfig_scriptlets -n foo-bar would work as well!
- -- 
- -Igor Gnatenko
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlpwQ6UACgkQaVcUvRu8
> X0wPLRAAmzXRfDQuCLGeGTcUHajpXcThH/t6df0/gEN/RFRK2EygZSg9kDcmbBA0
> hsPWjn8wFRUcWawGC7CbMEOWzPswjdsnikKs74YK2t4R7/HRCC1YnEeXRvP44ELg
> 20eaPOLmOG4DIPoEf4hldQKU8p/sI6udGt3npIHyYoWIci3e/yscLI83YxOvNuCU
> QNNaFUng7zBQVoMKwdiIdh1vpwX0jazPUr7ZySS97zQepFUXmWT1ahj1055s5An9
> Zl90UlnAjJU1KjrNT3PbglLl5V2bDcMmTBCoug3LFPxYVEPfeI1t1DSDB9rhec59
> +tbdktX0LYE9mXzTGqQ4W00XjRVw1LGgj6+xQFLkJWtPcGt2EEB4TEiz2gXGJCLv
> fu9BxZh9XNUCaxpIBGQziJpFjlap3Xb4OG6hG8+sndRZ6EVqbEF+DppTKdF7PoK8
> leuKuD4eVnF3zNpIdmepPwJ9ASZDZfH7eKQhphblaMKSCuzK0RkxfFqitwMG1nz8
> T9ehF2SL3g3kS9x7R+Hy8LsTI5Enc7QU8O0pEjmvvW0qyCIBpA4Zr7j3zWzA0jRl
> ow07rMTLaqB8oX3+XvkPhmclPX22bjevQY/c8q1A5zRcy+oG3SouJ04NtbE5Gcka
> y2mHVW/P3n1LcVrxOCc4CpbaQ9SI6/ylJf7UbNEr5j9BLtB29v0=
> =bKQP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Miroslav Lichvar]

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:04:48AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>  For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning:
> Thanks to Jason
>  Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
>  implementation. 
>  
>  Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
>  %ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets. 
The macros should be used instead of this conditional from the change
page?

%if (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 7) || (0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} <=
%27)

Which package is supposed to provide the macros? I don't see them in
an up-to-date F27 (and neither rawhide) buildroot.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar

[Igor Gnatenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 11:25 +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>  On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:04:48AM +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>  > For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning: Thanks to
>  > Jason
>  > Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
>  > implementation. 
>  > 
>  > Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
>  > %ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets.
>  
>  The macros should be used instead of this conditional from the change
>  page? 
Yes.

>  %if (0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 7) || (0%{?fedora}
> && 0%{?fedora} <= %27)
>  
>  Which package is supposed to provide the macros? I don't see them in
>  an up-to-date F27 (and neither rawhide) buildroot. 
redhat-rpm-config and epel-rpm-macros. Those are already in buildroot, but not
in updates yet (update is still pending).
- -- 
- -Igor Gnatenko
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAlpwSyEACgkQaVcUvRu8
> X0zseBAAqs2BcWiE8TZzMJHrsoZ2K4KK+ll5QApBXzOq9/lS8hvQhsKJIqeu5BLU
> uS9XxUdv34xcaKnc5bmnf7fZ54+i7H6DL/Cym3SOnYajJImxqztpQYKkLsKiLjNK
> Pl+Y3qWJJWFPKX/DdMO7R4I+Gf2LJxLUyoB4K9aN/ysUZxJW2y2ZpJLWNDBlV0A4
> 7Lm1+Jp4T82R95OyYTNwxQoNclOHFG0kVCvBN8sPKRDzdSiD4eVwJ+UmmIaV2BF+
> 9SZBmVA9tO+P9z+GfFSj8MJN7OuWdcNvOkGl/+o3zqKuJ+O+rlX+dQiH6HQTwb1O
> Pyl9JGwAct7ko7Je9mIyTQxZKmcUGNdPRJCVg9kJ34w4Yf/QU6fxpENkitFBuPRI
> uKgGuqQcLgTwwBarCa2l+mvxj7BrcoAsWRgZ/AiCSa9lvmztM5L9DZM9jkp5tSCZ
> K7xicbWc7KNn9mt666FyFJw083ld8eougGBzPForNj6WWBNhp8FjpjtZBsa7aIc/
> L9Jq49yDhLRlwtNKdU5ISmNZ+AyX4kzo/Jckn5eliFf7r/nEfsqV9fa/pTuBeTgm
> TDt9epyWCkQMtUMMQGekxmMXdJwqPC9jYJgy2lLkn4cZWsm6CTFTllbWA3DvzEBu
> mH0rfcrTUsxJdgdvmwWzYiPS60Oaq7ahcF8P94BT7CKn8AKqMqY=
> =cgpB
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Thomas Haller]

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 10:04 +0100, Igor Gnatenko wrote:
>  For those who didn't check Change page since today's morning:
> Thanks
>  to Jason
>  Tibbits (tibbs) who proposed %ldconfig_scriptlets macro and its
>  implementation. 
>  
>  Now we have 4 macros you could use: %ldconfig, %ldconfig_post,
>  %ldconfig_postun, %ldconfig_scriptlets.
>  
>  So long story short:
>  * If you have %post -p /sbin/ldconfig and %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig,
>  replace it
>  with %ldconfig_scriptlets
>  * If you have just one of those, replace it with %ldconfig_post or
>  %ldconfig_postun accordingly
>  * If you just call to /sbin/ldconfig from one of your scriptlets in
>  shell, just
>  replace it with %?ldconfig
>  
>  However, if you are not interested to support distro versions less
>  than F28,
>  then just remove scriptlets 😉 Although on F28+, those macro expand t
>  o nothin
>  g so it's just matter of having 1-2 additional lines in spec file. 
Hi,

now, building network-manager-applet(fc28) on Fedora 27, it fails:

Full log written to /data/src/fedpkg/network-manager-applet/network-
manager-applet-1.8.10/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/meson-logs/testlog.txt
+ %ldconfig_scriptlets -n libnma
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL: line 40: fg: no job control
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)


This doesn't seem right. Can we fix this? It seems very convenient to
be able to build a package for f28 across various Fedora versions,
because that is how I test the package...

See
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/network-manager-applet/c/d6f6981153e4b...


best,
Thomas


>  
>  On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 22:30 +0100, Jan Kurik wrote:
>  > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Removing ldconfig scriptlets =
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets
>  > 
>  > Change owner(s):
>  > * Igor Gnatenko <ignatenkobrain AT fedoraproject DOT org,>
>  > * Neal Gompa <ngompa13 AT gmail DOT com>
>  > 
>  > For many years, package maintainers were required to write
>  > scriptlets
>  > which call ldconfig in %post/%postun if they package shared
>  > libraries.
>  > 
>  > == Detailed Description ==
>  > Since time immemorial, Red Hat/Fedora packagers have been required
>  > to
>  > add a stanza to spec files for packages containing libraries to
>  > update
>  > the ldconfig cache.
>  > 
>  > %post -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  > %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
>  > 
>  > To say this is annoying is to put it mildly. However, there was no
>  > standard mechanism to make this boilerplate go away. Now with RPM
>  > 4.13+, we should change this to file triggers and make all of that
>  > go
>  > away.
>  > 
>  > With this change, these scriptlets can be removed and ldconfig
>  > would
>  > be run just once per transaction.
>  > 
>  > If your package places shared libraries in special locations
>  > referenced by ld.so.conf, you still need to run ldconfig manually.
>  > 
>  > For those who concerned about whether this is self-contained or
>  > system-wide change: there is no overhead if packagers don't remove
>  > ldconfig scriptlets in time, so completion doesn't depend whether
>  > packagers remove them or not. We are just making it possible.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > == Scope ==
>  > * Proposal owners:
>  > Make sure that DSO symlinks are being packagedcommit, add
>  > transaction
>  > filetriggers to glibccommit + commit.
>  > 
>  > * Other developers:
>  > Package maintainers are advised to remove ldconfig scriptlets in
>  > order
>  > to achieve benefits specified above.
>  > 
>  > * Release engineering:
>  > #7284: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7284
>  > 
>  > * List of deliverables:
>  > N/A (not a System Wide Change)
>  > 
>  > * Policies and guidelines:
>  > Packaging guidelines need to be updated to reflect reality.
>  > 
>  > * Trademark approval:
>  > N/A (not needed for this Change)
>  > -- 
>  > Jan Kuřík
>  > Platform & Fedora Program Manager
>  > Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Rex Dieter]

Thomas Haller wrote:

>  now, building network-manager-applet(fc28) on Fedora 27, it fails:
>  
>  Full log written to /data/src/fedpkg/network-manager-applet/network-
>  manager-applet-1.8.10/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/meson-logs/testlog.txt
>  + %ldconfig_scriptlets -n libnma
>  /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL: line 40: fg: no job control
>  error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
>      Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
>  
>  
>  This doesn't seem right. Can we fix this? It seems very convenient to
>  be able to build a package for f28 across various Fedora versions,
>  becauseredhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 that is how I test the package... 
If you're building locally, do you actually have redhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 
installed?   (It's currently still in updates-testing).

It is tagged as a koji buildroot override, so koji builds should get it too.

-- Rex

[Thomas Haller]

On Sun, 2018-02-04 at 09:08 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
>  Thomas Haller wrote:
>  
>  > now, building network-manager-applet(fc28) on Fedora 27, it fails:
>  > 
>  > Full log written to /data/src/fedpkg/network-manager-
>  > applet/network-
>  > manager-applet-1.8.10/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/meson-
>  > logs/testlog.txt
>  > + %ldconfig_scriptlets -n libnma
>  > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL: line 40: fg: no job control
>  > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
>  >     Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
>  > 
>  > 
>  > This doesn't seem right. Can we fix this? It seems very convenient
>  > to
>  > be able to build a package for f28 across various Fedora versions,
>  > becauseredhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 that is how I test the
>  > package...
>  
>  If you're building locally, do you actually have redhat-rpm-config-
>  70-1.fc27 
>  installed?   (It's currently still in updates-testing).
>  
>  It is tagged as a koji buildroot override, so koji builds should get
>  it too.
>   
Hi,

yes, redhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 fixes the build. Thanks.

As a suggestion, maybe not update packages in dist-git, before the
required packages hit Fedora stable...

best,
Thomas

[Rex Dieter]

Thomas Haller wrote:

>  On Sun, 2018-02-04 at 09:08 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > Thomas Haller wrote:
> > 
> > > now, building network-manager-applet(fc28) on Fedora 27, it fails:
> > > 
> > > Full log written to /data/src/fedpkg/network-manager-
> > > applet/network-
> > > manager-applet-1.8.10/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/meson-
> > > logs/testlog.txt
> > > + %ldconfig_scriptlets -n libnma
> > > /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL: line 40: fg: no job control
> > > error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
> > >     Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YVXizL (%check)
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This doesn't seem right. Can we fix this? It seems very convenient
> > > to
> > > be able to build a package for f28 across various Fedora versions,
> > > becauseredhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 that is how I test the
> > > package...
> > 
> > If you're building locally, do you actually have redhat-rpm-config-
> > 70-1.fc27
> > installed?   (It's currently still in updates-testing).
> > 
> > It is tagged as a koji buildroot override, so koji builds should get
> > it too.
> > 
>  
>  Hi,
>  
>  yes, redhat-rpm-config-70-1.fc27 fixes the build. Thanks.
>  
>  As a suggestion, maybe not update packages in dist-git, before the
>  required packages hit Fedora stable... 
As far as I know, packages were updated only in master/ branch, where the 
required packages were already available.

-- Rex