Re: cannot install postgis30 / rhel7

On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:18:42PM +0100, Devrim Gündüz wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 16:39 -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > --> Processing Dependency: sqlite-libs >= 3.7 for package: proj61-6.1.0-
> > 1.rhel7.x86_64
> > --> Finished Dependency Resolution
> > Error: Package: proj61-6.1.0-1.rhel7.x86_64 (pgdg10)
> > Requires: sqlite-libs >= 3.7
>
> Pushed new updates to the repo. Can you please test?
>
> They are in 9.4 to 11 (both stable and testing repos) and v12 (testing)
> repositories.

Confirmed I was able to install postgis30_11 (but didn't test the upgrade,
since we already worked around it to be able to install 12b4).

I think maybe the version number will sort wrong, same as the issue I reported
with postgresql12-12beta1:
|postgis30_11-3.0.0alpha4-4.rhel7.x86_64

Maybe it should be ~alpha4 or something?

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 09:55:00AM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> I'm wondering how versioning on PGDG RPMs is intended to work.
> Yum seems to thinks that the "nightly builds" are of higher version number than
> beta.
>
> [pryzbyj(at)dev ~]$ yum list --enablerepo='pgdg12-updates-testing' --showdu postgresql12
> ...
> Installed Packages
> postgresql12.x86_64 12.0-devel_20190502_1PGDG.rhel7 @pgdg12-updates-testing
> Available Packages
> postgresql12.x86_64 12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7 pgdg12-updates-testing
>
> [pryzbyj(at)dev ~]$ sudo yum --enablerepo=pgdg12-updates-testing install postgresql12{-server,-debuginfo,-contrib} #12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64
> Package matching postgresql12-server-12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 already installed. Checking for update.
> Package matching postgresql12-debuginfo-12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 already installed. Checking for update.
> Package matching postgresql12-contrib-12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64 already installed. Checking for update.
> Nothing to do
>
> I made it work like this:
> [pryzbyj(at)dev ~]$ sudo yum --enablerepo=pgdg12-updates-testing downgrade postgresql12{,-libs,-server,-debuginfo,-contrib}-12beta1-1PGDG.rhel7.x86_64
>
> ..which seems to prove that's what's going on.
>
> I recall that debian handles that using "~", like 12~beta1.
>
> At least, it should be called 12devel and 12beta1 for consistency? Or
> 12.0devel and 12.0beta1.