Fwd: Re: Roadmap for Mono packages in Fedora ?

Vít Ondruch vondruch at redhat.com
Mon Apr 13 10:47:59 UTC 2015

Actually, rereading this and my reply and Jaroslav's reply, I am not
sure anymore what do you mean by "shouldn't conflict with base system".
In my reply, I was thinking in a way that in Fedora, there is lets say
rubygem-minitest-5.3.1-2.fc21 but in Playground, there can be
rubygem-minitest-4.7.5-26.fc21. They don't conflict on filesystem, you
can even install them like:

    # dnf install 'rubygem-minitest < 5'

Unfortunatelly DNF/YUM handles them as an update, so:

    # dnf install 'rubygem-minitest > 5'

wipes the old version and in this sense they are "conflicting".


P.S. Actually, as you can play with the rubygem-minitest in Fedora as I
did on my F21, since there are available both versions I mentioned above ;)

Dne 10.4.2015 v 17:30 Honza Horak napsal(a):
> Haven't we agreed two weeks ago that playground packages shouldn't
> conflict with base system? that means new versions won't be in
> playground, for those pure copr should be enough.. the playground is
> supposed to be more for packages that cannot be in fedora due
> packaging guidelines issues (bundling is great example). At least this
> what I got from the meeting two weeks ago..
> Honza
> On 04/10/2015 02:46 PM, White, Langdon wrote:
>> Seems like a great oppty for a playground example... think envs and
>> stacks could follow up on this and help these guys get the existing mono
>> build they have in to playground while pkg reviews and the like take
>> place?
>> langdon
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Timotheus Pokorra" <timotheus.pokorra at solidcharity.com
>> <mailto:timotheus.pokorra at solidcharity.com>>
>> Date: Apr 10, 2015 2:38 AM
>> Subject: Re: Roadmap for Mono packages in Fedora ?
>> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>> <devel at lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:devel at lists.fedoraproject.org>>
>> Cc:
>> Hello,
>> this is my first post to this list. My name is Timotheus Pokorra, I am
>> from Germany, and I am also interested to get an uptodate version of
>> Mono into Fedora and later into CentOS or Epel.
>> I am developing and deploying OpenPetra, an administration software
>> under GPL for charities and mission organisations, on CentOS.
>> https://www.openpetra.org
>> I am maintaining Mono packages on OBS for various linux distributions:
>> https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor/home:tpokorra:mono
>> Obviously it is quite easy because there are no rules to follow.
>> I understand that a distribution like Fedora needs packaging rules,
>> and the rules have a good reason.
>>  > I am not working on this currently. Some one should inform upstream
>>  > that it doesn't build for GCC 5 / C++ 11.
>> It seems that Mono 4.0 Alpha1 builds fine on Rawhide:
>> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/elsupergomez/mono-4/build/85185/
>> I have added a comment to:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1089426
>> IMHO I think we should focus on getting Mono 4.0 into Fedora
>> (according to the "First" foundation of Fedora...)
>> All the best,
>>    Timotheus
>> -- 
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:devel at lists.fedoraproject.org>
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> _______________________________________________
> env-and-stacks mailing list
> env-and-stacks at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/env-and-stacks

More information about the env-and-stacks mailing list