Overview
Request 1200221 review
Fixed boo#1230351
- Created by heitormoreira
- In state review
- Open review for openSUSE:Backports:SLE-15-SP6
Loading...
Request History
heitormoreira created request
Fixed boo#1230351
factory-auto accepted review
Check script succeeded
maintbot added openSUSE:Backports:SLE-15-SP6 as a reviewer
Submission for None by someone who is not maintainer in the devel project (openSUSE:Backports:SLE-15-SP6). Please review
maintbot accepted review
ok
licensedigger accepted review
ok
This is not acceptable, the provides/obsoletes are present for a reason.
Would you mind providing what would be the reason?
The spec file already gives the reason. Some code moved from the kactivities frameworks to kactivitymanagerd. Users upgrading from an older Leap version would get a file conflict without these Provides/Obsoletes lines
I still can't figure out the reason from the spec file. If you feel like you can provide the real case, would be appreciated. I've checked Leap 15.0 and seems to be the same at least from that on. Nothing providing/requiring/recommending/suggesting libKF5Activities5-lang, such package doesn't even exist there.
The only thing that comes to my mind is file overlapping or overwriting, but I guess that the current language package wouldn't be the best place to deal with it, since such package is not mandatory and an installation with kactivities5 and libKF5Activities5-lang at the same time would probably generates unexpected results in case of conflicting files between libKF5Activities5-lang and kactivitymanagerd-lang.
It doesn't sound natural for a package to truly need a language package to work to justify providing libKF5Activities5-lang. If the obsoletes instruction is really necessary, wouldn't the kactivitymanagerd package be a better place to manage it instead of the optional language package?