Bug 898

Summary: fop / xmlgraphics-fop conflict
Product: Mageia Reporter: Claire Revillet <grenoya>
Component: RPM PackagesAssignee: D Morgan <dmorganec>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact:
Severity: normal    
Priority: Normal CC: manuel.mageia, misc, nanardon
Version: Cauldron   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Source RPM: xmlgraphics-fop-1.0-21.mga1.src.rpm CVE:
Status comment:

Description Claire Revillet 2011-04-19 22:18:59 CEST
Description of problem:
xmlgraphics-fop-1.0-21.mga1 obsoletes fop-0:1.0-0.0.4.mga1
but only fop-0:1.0 provide the fop.jar file.

I need fop.jar to build a package so I need to have the fop package installed.
As "BuilRequire: fop" mke urpmi install xmlgraphics-fop, I had to put it in BuildConflict to force urpmi install fop.

But each time I do urpmi --auto-update
I end up with xmlgraphics-fop installed.
So each time I have to remove all orphans ans reinstal all my requires.

Could it be possible to make juste 1 package with all the fonctionnalities or to make the to actual packages live together ? 

Thanks.
Comment 1 Ahmad Samir 2011-04-20 02:10:25 CEST
I think xmlgraphics-fop isn't needed, it's the same as fop, same upstream, same files in the rpms, just different names/versions.

I think xmlgraphics-fop should/can be dropped.

Assignee: bugsquad => sysadmin-bugs

Comment 2 Nicolas Vigier 2011-04-20 14:04:53 CEST
Maybe fop should obsolete xmlgraphics-fop ?

CC: (none) => boklm

Comment 3 Ahmad Samir 2011-04-20 18:19:11 CEST
xmlgraphics-fop didn't exist in mdv repos AFAICS, it was imported from OpenSuse (dmorgan needed it for some Java/maven stuff; I think he didn't notice 'fop' due to the difference in the package names).

Since this issue only existed in Cauldron for a couple of months an Obsoletes isn't needed, I think. Just an email on -dev so users uninstall it manually.
Comment 4 Michael Scherer 2011-04-20 20:43:11 CEST
Yup, a mail should be ok.

To prevent this in the future, we should maybe start to have some naming policy ( proposed by Nanar ) ?

CC: (none) => misc

Comment 5 Olivier Thauvin 2011-04-20 21:01:00 CEST
About this issue I failed to understand why fop is packaged currently as 'xmlgraphics-fop' and why it obsoletes 'fop' (if the java package is named simply 'fop').

I also don't understand why an 'xmlgraphics-fop.jar' is needed. but in the case this file is needed by another package, why it is not provide directly by fop.

We have policy for naming perl packages, ruby, python,... Then why don't we have any policy for java packages. Such policy would avoid the current issue, I think.

As solution, I suggest fop replace xmlgraphics-fop and provide same files.

CC: (none) => nanardon

Olivier Thauvin 2011-04-20 21:09:08 CEST

Assignee: sysadmin-bugs => dmorganec

Comment 6 Nicolas Vigier 2011-04-21 16:56:46 CEST
(In reply to comment #0)
> Description of problem:
> xmlgraphics-fop-1.0-21.mga1 obsoletes fop-0:1.0-0.0.4.mga1
> but only fop-0:1.0 provide the fop.jar file.
> 
> I need fop.jar to build a package so I need to have the fop package installed.
> As "BuilRequire: fop" mke urpmi install xmlgraphics-fop, I had to put it in
> BuildConflict to force urpmi install fop.

Did you try to build your package using xmlgraphics-fop.jar instead of fop.jar ?
As it is the same software, only with a different filename, it should probably work.

After looking at xmlgraphics-fop and fop packages, xmlgraphics-fop contains the maven config files, so I think we should use this one, so that in can be used in maven builds.

For the package name, it seems fop is part of xmlgraphics project, so that explain the naming. Package for batik, an other project that is part xmlgraphics is also called xmlgraphics-batik, so if we decide to use fop as the name we should also use batik as the name.

On jpackage and openSUSE the name is xmlgraphics-fop. On fedora the name is fop, but their package does not include maven config. As we are using the openSUSE package I think it would be better to keep the openSUSE name.
Comment 7 D Morgan 2011-04-23 01:51:42 CEST
i have added this obsolete and the complete  java stack clean is planned for the next week

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED

Comment 8 Manuel Hiebel 2011-04-25 13:30:46 CEST
still present see #977

Status: RESOLVED => REOPENED
CC: (none) => manuel
Resolution: FIXED => (none)

Comment 9 Manuel Hiebel 2011-04-25 13:31:51 CEST
*** Bug 977 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 D Morgan 2011-05-17 15:25:05 CEST
closing as xmlgraphics-fop is not in mageia anymore .

Status: REOPENED => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => FIXED

Nicolas Vigier 2014-05-08 18:05:57 CEST

CC: boklm => (none)