libraries missing on F22 and higher

[Sérgio Basto]

On Dom, 2015-12-27 at 00:48 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
> On 12/27/2015 12:26 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > On Thursday, 24 December 2015 at 11:02, Antonio Trande wrote:
> > > On 12/24/2015 12:32 AM, S�rgio Basto wrote:
> > > > On Qua, 2015-12-23 at 22:20 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
> > > > > On 12/23/2015 09:51 PM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
> > > > > > 2015-12-22 20:31 GMT+01:00 Antonio Trande 
> > > > > > <anto.trande at gmail.com <mailto:anto.trande at gmail.com>>:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > these libraries (and others probably) are not available yet
> > > > > > on Fedora 22 and devel branch. Please, require a rebuild 
> > > > > > (https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3821) as
> > > > > > soon as possible:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > faad2 libmpeg2 libdca twolame
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > All of them are actually available, please double check
> > > > > > your system.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Nicolas (kwizart)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Nicolas,
> > > > > 
> > > > > are available as fc23 packages?
> > > > 
> > > > no , they are available as fc22 in F23
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Honestly, I don't understand how we can tolerate something like
> > > that, that is using on Fedora 23 some packages built on Fedora
> > > 22; is there not any dependency issue?
> > 
> > No. RPM doesn't care about disttag for dependencies unless you
> > actually specify a dependency using it, e.g.: Requires: foo =
> > 1.1-2.fc23
> > 
> > As long as SONAMEs match (or actually, as long as Provides: match),
> > the dependencies are satisfied. There's nothing wrong with having
> > .fc22 packages in F23+ repos.
> > 
> 
> In 'faad2' case or some other case, yes for now.
> How do you know if a .fc22 package works fine on Fedora 23 if you
> don't rebuild?


Look at this link [1] for example Fedora 22 release , searching for
fc21 , firefox says more than 100 , only in letter R

[1]
http://mirrors.eu.kernel.org/fedora/releases/22/Everything/source/SRPMS
/r/


> Also, RPMFusion respects Fedora packaging guidelines or not? 

yes we do 

> Are you
> sure that in the meantime a package don't need any other changes like
> License packaging, dependency between sub-packages, or any minor
> fixes?


> Regards.
> 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.