[ATrpms-users] PIL conflicts with fedora python-imaging package
Jeffrey J. Kosowsky
atrpms at kosowsky.org
Tue Dec 1 20:12:08 CET 2009
Note posting this thread and my added comments back to the list so
hopefully Axel can also see and give his feedback ;)
Paulo Cavalcanti wrote at about 12:54:33 -0200 on Tuesday, December 1, 2009:
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky <atrpms at kosowsky.org>wrote:
> > Paulo Cavalcanti wrote at about 05:52:35 -0200 on Tuesday, December 1,
> > 2009:
> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky <
> > atrpms at kosowsky.org>wrote:
> > > > I must be missing something here.
> > > > Because hplip requires python-imaging while mytharchive requires PIL
> > > > and PIL and python-imaging conflict. And as far as 'rpm' knows they
> > > > are different rpms that just happen to share conflicting file names.
> > > >
> > > > So, I don't understand how I could install PIL without breaking
> > > > hplip's dependency on python-imaging.
> > > >
> > > > What am I missing here?
> > > >
> > >
> > > PIL provides python-imaging:
> > >
> > > cascavel:~] rpm -qi --whatprovides python-imaging
> > Thanks Paulo.
> > I have been using rpms for almost 15 years and never realized that one
> > package could 'provide' another package too.
> > Would it work (and make sense) to have PIL 'obsolete' python-imaging
> > so that it would automatically replace it while also providing it or
> > would that not work?
> Yes, it makes all the sense. This should have been done a long time ago.
> The problem, I think, is that Axel does not want to be accused of replacing
> core packages any more.
That is understandable. And I too prefer not to obsolete and replace
"standard" Fedora packages unnecessarily. Especially, since you never
know what that could break down the road on the Fedora side...
> I really do not know why he is using PIL and not the original
> Maybe he replies one of those mails ...
I think that is the real answer.
Both python-imaging and PIL are based on the same version of the
python imaging library. They have mostly the same files with each
containing a few that the other doesn't.
That being the case it seems like the best solution is to either
eliminate PIL if python-imaging has all the necessary functionality or
alternatively make up a new python-imaging-extras package that just
includes the files that may be missing in the Fedora version (or
alternatively ask the Fedora maintainers to include them).
More information about the atrpms-users