doxbox-staging package conflict

[Vitaly Zaitsev]

Hello all.

doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:

Installing:
  dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34 
  fedora            1.4 M
      replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34

 From its SPEC[1]:

# This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4

Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the 
Fedora packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with 
another.

[1]: 
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dosbox-staging/blob/rawhide/f/dosbox-s...

-- 
Sincerely,
   Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>  Hello all.
>  
>  doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
>  
>  Installing:
>   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora            1.4 M
>       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
>  
>  From its SPEC[1]:
>  
>  # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
>  Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
>  Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
>  
>  Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the Fedora packaging
> guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another. 
This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream so we have
decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox staging:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608

As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox (and it is
fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox owner, but
we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire dosbox in
rawhide right away.

Regards,

Hans


*) They have not done a release in many years, nor has any meaningful feature development
are maintenance like moving to SDL2 happened.

[Otto Urpelainen]

Hans de Goede kirjoitti 1.6.2021 klo 21.02:
>  Hi,
>  
>  On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> > Hello all.
> >
> > doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
> >
> > Installing:
> >   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora            1.4 M
> >       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
> >
> >  From its SPEC[1]:
> >
> > # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
> > Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
> > Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
> >
> > Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the Fedora
> packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another.
>  
>  This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream so we have
> decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox staging:
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608
>  
>  As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox (and it is
> fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox owner, but
> we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire dosbox in
> rawhide right away. 
I think it is great that Fedora now has dosbox-staging and arrow keys 
work again. Many games were quite annoying to play without them. And 
there are other improvements as well.

But the complaint I have about this process is that, if you use the 
default dosbox-staging config, quite many games that actually ran with 
dosbox crash on dosbox-staging startup. That problem should be patched 
around somehow before dosbox can go. See Bugzilla discussion [1].

[1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933849#c4

Otto

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 4:34 PM Otto Urpelainen <oturpe(a)iki.fi&gt; wrote:
>  Hans de Goede kirjoitti 1.6.2021 klo 21.02:
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>  >> Hello all.
>  >>
>  >> doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
>  >>
>  >> Installing:
>  >>   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora           
> 1.4 M
>  >>       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
>  >>
>  >>  From its SPEC[1]:
>  >>
>  >> # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
>  >> Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
>  >> Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
>  >>
>  >> Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the Fedora
> packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another.
>  >
>  > This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream so we
> have decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox staging:
>  > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608
>  >
>  > As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox (and it
> is fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox owner,
> but we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire dosbox
> in rawhide right away.
>
>  I think it is great that Fedora now has dosbox-staging and arrow keys
>  work again. Many games were quite annoying to play without them. And
>  there are other improvements as well.
>
>  But the complaint I have about this process is that, if you use the
>  default dosbox-staging config, quite many games that actually ran with
>  dosbox crash on dosbox-staging startup. That problem should be patched
>  around somehow before dosbox can go. See Bugzilla discussion [1].
>
>  [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933849#c4
>  
As an aside, I'm slightly confused why dosbox wasn't just replaced
with dosbox-staging with the same packaging...



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!

[François Cami]

On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 10:36 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 4:34 PM Otto Urpelainen <oturpe(a)iki.fi&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Hans de Goede kirjoitti 1.6.2021 klo 21.02:
>  > > Hi,
>  > >
>  > > On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>  > >> Hello all.
>  > >>
>  > >> doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
>  > >>
>  > >> Installing:
>  > >>   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora        
>    1.4 M
>  > >>       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
>  > >>
>  > >>  From its SPEC[1]:
>  > >>
>  > >> # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
>  > >> Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
>  > >> Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
>  > >>
>  > >> Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the
> Fedora packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another.
>  > >
>  > > This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream
> so we have decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox
> staging:
>  > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608
>  > >
>  > > As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox (and
> it is fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox
> owner, but we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire
> dosbox in rawhide right away.
>  >
>  > I think it is great that Fedora now has dosbox-staging and arrow keys
>  > work again. Many games were quite annoying to play without them. And
>  > there are other improvements as well.
>  >
>  > But the complaint I have about this process is that, if you use the
>  > default dosbox-staging config, quite many games that actually ran with
>  > dosbox crash on dosbox-staging startup. That problem should be patched
>  > around somehow before dosbox can go. See Bugzilla discussion [1].
>  >
>  > [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933849#c4
>  >
>
>  As an aside, I'm slightly confused why dosbox wasn't just replaced
>  with dosbox-staging with the same packaging... 
Different upstreams (different teams, etc).

F.

> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 6/2/21 12:47 AM, François Cami wrote:
>  On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 10:36 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 4:34 PM Otto Urpelainen <oturpe(a)iki.fi&gt; wrote:
> >>
> >> Hans de Goede kirjoitti 1.6.2021 klo 21.02:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> >>>> Hello all.
> >>>>
> >>>> doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
> >>>>
> >>>> Installing:
> >>>>   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora      
>      1.4 M
> >>>>       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
> >>>>
> >>>>  From its SPEC[1]:
> >>>>
> >>>> # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
> >>>> Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
> >>>> Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
> >>>>
> >>>> Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the
> Fedora packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another.
> >>>
> >>> This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream
> so we have decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox
> staging:
> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608
> >>>
> >>> As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox
> (and it is fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox
> owner, but we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire
> dosbox in rawhide right away.
> >>
> >> I think it is great that Fedora now has dosbox-staging and arrow keys
> >> work again. Many games were quite annoying to play without them. And
> >> there are other improvements as well.
> >>
> >> But the complaint I have about this process is that, if you use the
> >> default dosbox-staging config, quite many games that actually ran with
> >> dosbox crash on dosbox-staging startup. That problem should be patched
> >> around somehow before dosbox can go. See Bugzilla discussion [1].
> >>
> >> [1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933849#c4
> >>
> >
> > As an aside, I'm slightly confused why dosbox wasn't just replaced
> > with dosbox-staging with the same packaging...
>  
>  Different upstreams (different teams, etc). 
Right, the original dosbox project is still somewhat alive, so the purpose
of having a dosbox-staging package instead of just putting the tarbal from
dosbox-staging into the dosbox package is to make it clear that Fedora is
packaging dosbox-staging and not the original dosbox.

Regards,

Hans

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 6/1/21 10:33 PM, Otto Urpelainen wrote:
>  Hans de Goede kirjoitti 1.6.2021 klo 21.02:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 6/1/21 6:20 PM, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
> >> Hello all.
> >>
> >> doxbox-staging is trying to overwrite the regular dosbox package:
> >>
> >> Installing:
> >>   dosbox-staging            x86_64            0.76.0-2.fc34  fedora           
> 1.4 M
> >>       replacing  dosbox.x86_64 0.74.3-7.fc34
> >>
> >>  From its SPEC[1]:
> >>
> >> # This package is a drop-in replacement for dosbox
> >> Provides:  dosbox = %{version}-%{release}
> >> Obsoletes: dosbox < 0.74.4
> >>
> >> Is this Okay? These packages has different maintainers. According to the Fedora
> packaging guidelines, one package cannot introduce conflicts with another.
> >
> > This is intentional, regular dosbox is more-or-less (*) unmaintained upstream so we
> have decided to switch to dosbox-staging, also see the Package Review for dosbox staging:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884608
> >
> > As such dosbox-staging is intended as a replacement for the regular dosbox (and it is
> fully compatible with the regular dosbox). This was coordinated with the dosbox owner, but
> we have forgotten to actually retire dosbox, sorry about that. I'll retire dosbox in
> rawhide right away.
>  
>  I think it is great that Fedora now has dosbox-staging and arrow keys work again. Many
> games were quite annoying to play without them. And there are other improvements as well.
>  
>  But the complaint I have about this process is that, if you use the default
> dosbox-staging config, quite many games that actually ran with dosbox crash on
> dosbox-staging startup. That problem should be patched around somehow before dosbox can
> go. See Bugzilla discussion [1]. 
Good news, the exec-heap permission issue should be fixed by this upstream commit:

https://github.com/dosbox-staging/dosbox-staging/commit/649a428dc368cc03b...

Unfortunately this does not apply at all to 0.76.0 though, so we cannot just cherry-pick
the fix and add it to the Fedora packages.

One option would be to switch to a git snapshot for now.

Lets discuss this further in:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1960865

Which seems to be the bug where this is actually being tracked.

Regards,

Hans