This request is superseded by
request 1199338
(Show diff)
Overview
Request 1191454 superseded
add Provides for binaries in poppler-tools package
- Created by ojkastl_buildservice
- In state superseded
- 7 package maintainers
- Superseded by 1199338
Loading...
Request History
ojkastl_buildservice created request
add Provides for binaries in poppler-tools package
gnome-review-bot accepted review
Check script succeeded
gnome-review-bot approved review
Check script succeeded
iznogood declined request
Decline - please see comment
iznogood reopened request
OK - reopen req - lets get a "second opinion" as they say in tv-shows :-)
dirkmueller declined request
see https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/1191454#comment-1976478
ojkastl_buildservice superseded request
superseded by 1199338
Each time I need to install pdfunite or pdfseparate on a new machine, I have to remember that they are in poppler-tools. So hopefully the "Provides" would allow zypper to find the right package when searching for one of the tools.
Not sure if the Provides should be for
/usr/bin/xxx
instead.I'll reject this sub, as we already have the "knob" to turn in zypper search to find the binary
heck, even with just --file-list it zypper finds it
It is of course your call to decline this SR.
But please give it another thought. Yes, zypper has lots of "knobs" and options to make it find things. But do you honestly think everybody is using them on a daily basis and remembers them? Do you think newbies know that those options exist at all?
Or to ask differently: What's the harm in having your package be found more easily?
What is the harm in having some "Provides"? It's not like there is a new program being added on a weekly basis...
Kind Regards Johannes
I do not have a strong pref, but the main argument against adding manual provides is that we have to ensure that we do not keep providing things that upstream perhaps removes at a later time :-)
The rejection was more of just make a decision since the req had 2 weeks on it, and it seems "nobody" wanted to review it.
@ojkastl_buildservice I'm okay with additional compatibility provides if it matches other distributions packaging scheme (e.g. fedora as the prime example). but please don't do unversioned provides. change it to
Provides: foo = %{version}
Sorry for the delay, vacation time.
See new SR#1199338
@dirkmueller, @keichwa, @mkudlvasr, @mseben, @simotek: review reminder