https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1623764
Petr Kubat pkubat@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Petr Kubat pkubat@redhat.com --- (In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #2)
Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/libpq/libpq.git/ plain/libpq.spec?id=c505e10b2b79b0efc30f73ee2608e3497517f08e SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/praiskup/libpq/fedora- rawhide-x86_64/00794229-libpq/libpq-10.5-3.fc30.src.rpm
Thanks for the your comments!
The 10.6 was just development string (I wasn't sure what will be the final Release right before implementing this chagne) -- so correct should be '10.5-4' (at this point in time) because the latest Release shipped in postgresql-libs is '10.5.3'.
Whether the package obsoletes itself..., I'm not sure. I don't think it has such effect in the end. But I bumped the Release to '3' to make sure it's OK.
LGTM now (with the changes in comment 3).
It's not that strict in current Fedora, and directories might co-own files. The list is pretty sane, /usr/include/libpq will be owned only by libpq (same as '/usr/include/pgsql/internal/libpq'), /usr/share/pgsql will be co-owned by (otherwise not coupled in any way) 'libpq-devel' and 'postgresql-server-devel' (ditto for /usr/include/pgsql/internal).
Makes sense. This way there should not be any issues with co-ownerships as it is only forbidden (iiuc) when a directory is owned by a required package.
[!]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Expected failure as it conflicts with postgresql for now.
Yes, 'postgresql.spec' will be updated atomically with build of libpq.spec and libecpg.spec.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
This requires some work. But libpq.so will be tested extensively by the postgresql.spec builds.
I agree this should be enough for now.
Thanks for the changes! LGTM