GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 697122
Snappy name conflicts
Last modified: 2013-11-20 20:23:31 UTC
Binary name of Snappy collides with that one of other packages in Fedora, as well as its name. For example, actually in Fedora we have: Available Packages Name : snappy Repo : fedora/18/x86_64 Summary : Fast compression and decompression library URL : http://code.google.com/p/snappy/ License : BSD or binaries owned by other packages $ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/bin/snappy spice-gtk-tools-0:0.15.3-1.fc18.x86_64 spice-gtk-tools-0:0.14-1.fc18.x86_64 This would impede inclusion of Snappy (player) in official Fedora repos and above all could be a obstacle if someone wants Snappy and spice-gtk-tools installed together in the same system. Is there a chance to change Snappy's binary name and its package name ? Regards.
Hello. Thinking about if I can change the name or not, and what to change it to. I knew about the snappy library Google released, but I didn't knew there was a /usr/bin/snappy executable as part of it. What does it do?
Hi Luis. Google compression library doesn't provide a binary but has same package name: http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/18/x86_64/s/snappy-1.0.5-2.fc18.i686.html I spoke of spice-gtk-tools that provides a binary with same identical name (see at bottom of page): http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/fedora/updates/18/i386/spice-gtk-tools-0.15.3-1.fc18.i686.html If you agree, a name like 'gnome-snappy' may be already good.
Antonio, I'm going to talk with the Spice people because they are going to find the same conflict when Spice is packaged for debian, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE and gentoo. Where the snappy player already owns the /usr/bin/snappy file. Let me see what they think.
What about just using 'snappy-player' as a name, and /usr/bin/snappy-player ? Not only is there a snappy binary for spice-gtk, but the snappy package already exists in several distros.
Andrew, That isn't an ideal solution and doesn't solve the problem spice-gtk will have in distros with snappy (player) already.
In OpenSUSE, I seen the Google library named 'libsnappy' (https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?expand=1&file=libsnappy.spec&package=snappy&project=home%3Axkitty68) but 'spice-gtk' package owns an /usr/bin/snappy binary: https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?expand=1&file=spice-gtk.spec&package=spice-gtk&project=openSUSE%3A12.2 like it's snappy player https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?expand=1&file=snappy.spec&package=snappy&project=GNOME%3AApps Both packages are in conflict therefore or someone changes own binary file otherwise both packages MUST be incompatible between them.
So it looks like it collides in most distros except debian. I'm OK renaming the executable snappy-player.
(In reply to comment #7) > I'm OK renaming the executable snappy-player. In my opinion, it's best and wise choice. I wait new release of snappy so that I can introduce it in Fedora.
Sure. I will push those changes upstream soon. Thanks for packaging snappy in Fedora :)
(In reply to comment #5) > Andrew, > > That isn't an ideal solution and doesn't solve the problem spice-gtk will have > in distros with snappy (player) already. Sorry, I don't see why? spice-gtk provides the "snappy" binary; the snappy library doesn't, but the name conflicts. So, when I installed it on fedora, a 'yum upgrade' tried to upgrade my 0.3.5 package to the google library :-)
Andrew, yum will upgrade the packages you already have installed. not sure I'm really understanding what you are saying.
Sorry, ignore it :-) I just meant, that not only the binary is taken, but also the package name on some distros. ie, assuming it is 'libsnappy' everywhere isn't correct. But, reading comment 7, it seems that was discussed already.
No problem Andrew :)
(In reply to comment #12) > Sorry, ignore it :-) I just meant, that not only the binary is taken, but also > the package name on some distros. This is right (see my initial comment). In Fedora in fact we have a 'snappy' library (not a 'libsnappy') and an /usr/bin/snappy owned by 'spice-gtk-tools' package. It's a double conflict. If Luis renames just the binary of snappy (player), I'll be compelled anyway to rename the package name to 'gnome-snappy' for example.
Talking to the developers of spice-gtk. We might have a good solution for this. Discussing it in spice-devel so we can all agree.
A decision has been made in this Spice-devel mailing list thread: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/2013-April/012953.html "I suggest for upcoming release to rename snappy to something like snappy-spice (that would be easy enough to discover when completing for ex)" Soon a new spice-gtk release is going to come out, this will have moved the executable to /usr/bin/snappy-spice. Then snappy (the player) can be packaged in Fedora as... package name = snappy-player executable = /usr/bin/snappy Thanks Marc-Andre! :)