On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 15:11, seth vidal wrote: > > So 1.0 seems to think no-epoch < 0, which I think should be fixed to > > no-epoch == 0. > > This sounds to me like the behavior in yum 1.0 is wrong. Agreed. > OR it could be b/c yum 1.0 is for rpm 4.0.4 and yum 1.95 is for rpm 4.2 > that you're seeing the difference. I failed to mention that I'm using 1.95 on RH9 (rpm-4.2-0.69) and 1.0 on RH8 (rpm-4.1-9 from JBJ's testing area). Dunno if this makes a difference. > and rpm 4.0.4 considers no epoch < 0 > rpm 4.2 seems to consider no epoch == 0 > > So I don't think yum should be "fixed" to violate what rpm thinks for > that version of rpm. Makes sense, but IMO yum 1.0 needs to be more consistent. As said, yum check-update lists the package as something that could be updated, but yum install and yum update refuse to actually update it. [ And BTW Seth; a list copy of replies is fine with me, I don't need them twice if this is no problem to you, thanks :) ] -- \/ille Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi
