[X2Go-Dev] Bug#755: cannot upgrade x2goServer on fedora 20 using yum

[Mihai Moldovan]

On 23.03.2015 04:35 PM, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> it's again related to mapping the .deb packaging to the way we package
> for .rpm distros.
>
> First, the objective was: having the same package names for both ways
> of packaging, so that people can read/write docs alike for both distro
> types.
>
> Second, in .spec files, there is no such thing as a "Recommends:"
> package relationship, so I used "Requires:" for what is under
> "Recommends:" in the .deb way of packaging.

This is both true and false at the same time. Back then, RPM didn't have
"weak dependencies", but they were "recently" added to SuSE and Fedora:
https://en.opensuse.org/Libzypp/Dependencies#Weak_dependencies --
http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2014-February/003666.html


> Third, the package x2goserver-extensions and x2goserver-xsession have
> been contributed by me to X2Go. In the beginning, I wanted to make
> sure to provide some extra stuff that people can add to their X2Go
> Server installations. I did not want to enforce their usage on already
> deployed systems.
>
> Then... The more bugs had been reported against x2goserver-xsession,
> the more I elevated the level of dependency (from nothing to Suggests:
> to Recommends:).
>
> About x2goserver-extensions: keeping it as a separate package allows
> people (with a .deb based distro--it is under Recommends: IIRC)

Sorry! My fault, I have not seen that it's under "Recommends". You're right.


> to remove the package and disable extensions globally. But now that
> several of our own X2Go components use the extension add-on package,
> this has virtually become a not-to-do scenario, actually.

So using x2goserver without x2goserver-extensions doesn't work anyway,
as it currently stands? It's probably even "worse" for heuler (just an
estimation, I didn't actually check.)


> I hope that helps to clarify the history of those add-on packages,
> that should actually by merged into the main x2goserver package.

If that's the best course of action, I'm keeping that in mind.
x2goserver-xsession could probably still stay a different package,
because I don't remember any core server component making use of it,
other than for desktop type session support. This said, it may still be
a better idea to merge x2goserver and x2goserver-xsession, because it
likely confuses users to have to install "some additional package" to
get features always exposed by the clients.


> And...
>
>   o Don't forget to scan the wiki.x2go.org site for those package
> names and update the passages appropriately.
>   o Don't forget to provide transitional dummy package that allow
> smooth upgrade of systems having old versions of those packages
> installed.

Yep, thanks for the reminder.


I'm just adding another thought here: while weak dependencies may work
for recent SUSE versions, especially SLE{S,D} 11, OpenSUSE 11 and maybe
even 12 may have no support for this. OpenSUSE 11 is long since EOL,
OpenSUSE 12 has been EOL'd recently, but SLE{S,D} 11 is still alive and
kicking according to https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/ until end of march
20_19_ or 20_22_ (ouch...)

For Fedora/RHEL/EPEL, the "weak dependencies" situation is even worse.
We cannot rely on them on these platforms.

Generally, we should regard weak dependencies as currently non-existent
on RPM-based platforms. Hopefully support for that sort of thing will
one day be universal...



Mihai

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 884 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x2go.org/pipermail/x2go-dev/attachments/20150324/cfe2c6b5/attachment.pgp>