A look at VR and R in subpackages

[Michael Schwendt]

For the problem of making rpmdev-bumpspec handle subpackages that
explicitly specify a Release tag, I've examined the repo metadata for all
packages in F20 plus updates-testing plus RPM Fusion free.

 * Only four packages define subpackages with a Version and Release tag
that differs from the base package.

 * Just almost two dozen packages define subpackages with a Version tag
that differs from the base package.

Some of these may not be trivial to bump for a human packager either,
because of the problem that one must not reset a subpackage %release when
the base package %release is reset during a %version upgrade. Some of the
packages in this list use lots of macros to build something that enters
the Release tag definition for subpackages. Where this is not anything
recognized by rpmdev-bumpspec, such as the %baserelease macro or a value
derived from base %release, the script will continue to bump Release tags
at the very right (= least-significant) location because it doesn't know
better. ;-)

The special multi-subpackage spec files I've found and tested with are:


Different VR:
['Saaghar', 'linux-firmware', 'openssh', 'texlive']

Only different R:
[]

Only different V:
['antlr3', 'beesu', 'bpg-fonts', 'brltty',
'ding-libs', 'eclipse-linuxtools', 'festival', 'ganglia',
'ghc', 'haskell-platform', 'iaxclient', 'lpg',
'lvm2', 'nhn-nanum-fonts', 'openlmi-scripts', 'perl',
'perl-PBS', 'ruby', 'svxlink', 'texlive',
'thunderbird-lightning', 'trustedqsl', 'xonotic']

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 07:58:43PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>  ['antlr3', 'beesu', 'bpg-fonts',
> 'brltty', 'ding-libs',
>  'eclipse-linuxtools', 'festival', 'ganglia', 'ghc',
> 'haskell-platform',
>  'iaxclient', 'lpg', 'lvm2', 'nhn-nanum-fonts',
> 'openlmi-scripts', 'perl',
>  'perl-PBS', 'ruby', 'svxlink', 'texlive',
> 'thunderbird-lightning',
>  'trustedqsl', 'xonotic'] 

Festival is my fault from way back when (2005, looks like). It actually is a
distribution of related packages all in one source RPM, and it probably
should be all disentangled.  There's actually a 2.1 release (from over three
years ago!) that it should be updated to, and probably that fixed at the
same time.

-- 
Matthew Miller    --   Fedora Project    --    <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 14:07:56 -0500,
   Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 07:58:43PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > ['antlr3', 'beesu', 'bpg-fonts', 'brltty',
> 'ding-libs',
> > 'eclipse-linuxtools', 'festival', 'ganglia', 'ghc',
> 'haskell-platform',
> > 'iaxclient', 'lpg', 'lvm2', 'nhn-nanum-fonts',
> 'openlmi-scripts', 'perl',
> > 'perl-PBS', 'ruby', 'svxlink', 'texlive',
> 'thunderbird-lightning',
> > 'trustedqsl', 'xonotic']
>
>
> Festival is my fault from way back when (2005, looks like). It actually is a
> distribution of related packages all in one source RPM, and it probably
> should be all disentangled.  There's actually a 2.1 release (from over three
> years ago!) that it should be updated to, and probably that fixed at the
> same time. 
Yeah, I was supposed to get help with that. I was going to just try to 
keep the current version working until the other person had time to 
work on doing the upgrade. I haven't had time to carefully look over 
what is needed for upgrading to 2.1.

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:50:46PM -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>  >Festival is my fault from way back when (2005, looks like). It
> actually is a
>  >distribution of related packages all in one source RPM, and it probably
>  >should be all disentangled.  There's actually a 2.1 release (from over three
>  >years ago!) that it should be updated to, and probably that fixed at the
>  >same time.
>  Yeah, I was supposed to get help with that. I was going to just try
>  to keep the current version working until the other person had time
>  to work on doing the upgrade. I haven't had time to carefully look
>  over what is needed for upgrading to 2.1. 
Plenty of self-blame to go around. :) In any case, when we do get to it, I
think we should detangle the source packages into their own separate
packages.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Hi,

texlive and bpg-fonts are due to bundling of different projects with
different versions upstream. They are unbundled in subpackages at Fedora

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot