Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> writes: > Hmm, I don't understand, could you elaborate/rephrase? > > "foo >=" without a version doesn't make sense to me, for example rpmbuild > doesn't let "Requires: foo >=" pass. Is it actually possible to have such > relations that have name, the = >= and friends bits, but no version in > packages? If it's not possible to do, then surely having bad output for those impossible cases isn't a problem?:) In reality there is more than just the current version of rpmbuild. > In the commit message where the patch was reverted, it says "This isn't right > ... Eg. =>, (None, None, None) VS. < (1, 2, 3) is false.". Isn't > formatRequire() just for formatting stuff for humans to read, what does it > have to do with actual version comparisons? Yes, it's just for output ... but if a package refuses to install and the output says "dependency not found 'foo'", and we look and something is providing 'foo < 1' and we are requiring 'foo' that will be very confusing ... whereas if the output says "dependency not found 'foo >='" we'll know that something is weird (and why the dep. failed). -- James Antill -- james@xxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Yum mailing list Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum
