On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:12:10 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Some examples: > > * In some cases such "known bugs" prevent Fedora Extras to supply > packages for downstream releases, because the officially released > packages the Fedora Extras packages are based on are broken. > > E.g. "missing shared libs in ghostview" > http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88175 > break gsview for FC1 > https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=1940 Though, in this case the extra package should not have been released for FC1. The explicit dependency on a shared library soname should not have passed QA for FC1. > IMO, it would be best if RH/FC would prefer not to close bugs as "CLOSED > RAWHIDE" when ever reasonable/applicable and to officially upgrade the > package instead. > Alternatively, it could also be worth to consider handing over such a > package to "Fedora Extra" for "interim band-aid packages". No. That would make it a Fedora Core bug-fix update and would not be an extra package. Updates to Fedora Core must not be released in Fedora Extras.
