On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 15:23 -0400, Joshua Jensen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 03:59:13PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > > It's how a lot of people determine an 'update' and the reason why > > obsoletes is a configurable option. > > > > Anaconda treats obsoletes as updates, so does up2date. > > > > it's a long-running argument, ultimately. > > > > -sv > > Wow, I had no idea. I can see both sides... this perspective provides > insight to my https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=141914 > bug too... interesting. The gist of the problem is that if you allow obsoletes to update then you can be introducing new software when someone doesn't expect it. If you don't allow obsoletes as an update you can make it next to impossible for certain updates to occur. Especially if a package HAS to go away for security reasons. such a good time. No, really. I mean it. -sv
