Filtering question

[Alec Leamas]

On 06/22/2012 01:45 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Alec Leamas wrote:
>> I'm reviewing a package 2300  which at a glance seems to need filtering:
>> it both Requires: and Provides: it's internal plugin libraries, many of
>> which with generic names likely to clash with other packages symbols.
>>
>> But when I look at the guidelines at
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering,
>> they seem to be contradictory:
>>    - One one hand, a package "Must not export RPM dependency information
>> which is not global in nature..." e. g., plugins.
>>    - On the other, a package which have binaries in PATH and/or system
>> libraries must not use filtering; this applies also to sub-packages.
> The reason for this restriction is because the way the filtering was
> implemented for versions of RPM older than 4.9 didn't support ELF coloring.
> RPM 4.9 now has native filtering support and the macros have become just
> wrappers around that.
>
>> 2300 is, at present, a package with binaries in $PATH (can't use
>> filtering) providing and requiring it's own plugins (must be filtered).
>> What should we do?
>>
>> Split into two independent packages built from same source?
>>
>> Thoughts?
> All currently supported versions of Fedora (but not RHEL) have RPM 4.9 or
> newer (even the almost-EOL F15 has 4.9.1), so the problem should be safe to
> ignore for packages only targeting Fedora and not EL.
>
> We should probably also get the guidelines updated to recommend using the
> RPM 4.9 filtering builtins directly rather than through those macros (and
> remove the obsolete restrictions on where filters may be used), but that's a
> matter for the FPC (Fedora Packaging Committee), so it needs to be brought
> to them.
>
>          Kevin Kofler
I've filed a fpc bug against this: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/189