More explanation requested for warning about rawhide inheriting updates

Kevin Kofler kevin.kofler at
Mon Mar 12 00:06:51 UTC 2012

Eric Smith wrote:
> I've seen that done, but didn't know the purpose.  I think it's the
> right case in my situation.  I've updated muParser in rawhide, and am
> pushing updates for F16 and F17.  muParser has a new so version.
> Meshlab depends on muParser, but meshlab currently won't build in F17
> and rawhide due to GCC 4.7 becoming more picky about C++ namespace
> rules.  I'm waiting for help upstream with getting Meshlab to build with
> GCC 4.7, but in the mean time I want to do a rebuild of meshlab for F16
> to use the new muParser.  It looks like I should add the ".1" suffix
> after %{dist}for F16 and push an update.

* You cannot push the new muParser to F17 because it breaks dependencies if 
Meshlab is not rebuilt against it.
* You cannot push the new muParser to F16 if you aren't pushing it to F17 
(which isn't possible due to the above) because it breaks the upgrade path.

Thus, you cannot push any muParser updates until you resolve the meshlab 
build issue.

        Kevin Kofler

More information about the devel mailing list