[Mageia-dev] protobuf package problem

[Dexter Morgan]

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:34 AM, Pascal Terjan <pterjan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 23:30, Dexter Morgan <dmorganec at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Pascal Terjan <pterjan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 16:05, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:
>>>> 'Twas brillig, and Dexter Morgan at 20/05/11 14:21 did gyre and gimble:
>>>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Dexter Morgan <dmorganec at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:
>>>>>>> 'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 20/05/11 11:22 did gyre and gimble:
>>>>>>>> To satisfy dependencies, the following packages are going to be installed:
>>>>>>>>    Package                        Version      Release       Arch
>>>>>>>> (medium "CoreRelease-64")
>>>>>>>>   protobuf                       2.3.0        10.mga1       x86_64
>>>>>>>>   protobuf-compiler              2.3.0        10.mga1       x86_64
>>>>>>>> 1.6MB of additional disk space will be used.
>>>>>>>> 473KB of packages will be retrieved.
>>>>>>>> Proceed with the installation of the 2 packages? (Y/n)
>>>>>
>>>>> can you test new packages please ?
>>>>
>>>> Got it. Seems to work great. Thanks :D
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is it intended that most subpackages no longer exist and were not
>>> obsoleted (all the -10) ?
>>>
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-vim-2.3.0-11.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-java-2.3.0-11.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-devel-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-devel-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-static-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-static-2.3.0-10.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-compiler-2.3.0-11.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/core/release/protobuf-javadoc-2.3.0-11.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/x86_64/media/debug/core/release/protobuf-debug-2.3.0-11.mga1.x86_64.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/SRPMS/core/release/protobuf-2.3.0-11.mga1.src.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-vim-2.3.0-11.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-devel-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-static-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-static-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-lite-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-devel-2.3.0-10.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-compiler-2.3.0-11.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-java-2.3.0-11.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/core/release/protobuf-javadoc-2.3.0-11.mga1.i586.rpm
>>> /distrib/bootstrap/distrib/cauldron/i586/media/debug/core/release/protobuf-debug-2.3.0-11.mga1.i586.rpm
>>>
>>
>> As this was a cauldron only issue i though this wasn't needed, do you
>> prefer them to be obsoleted ?
>> i can do it right now if needed.
>
> No but I won't remove them from mirrors if this is not normal, that's
> why I asked if it was intended
>

Yes they need to be removed, just that i forgotten ( lazyness who knows :) ).

Thanks for spotting this issue.