Hi folks, I also got bitten by the "FC11 packages 'newer' than FC12" hickup, and while going through the yum remove/add maneuver I pondered: - is there ever a time when, while upgrading from Fedora n to Fedora n+1 I would expect a package .fcn to be kept instead of getting the .fcn+1 instance ? My answer was: no So I wondered if there would be a simple way to make this happen regardless of whether a maintainer blunders and gets things slightly out of sync between the 2 or 3 current Fedora releases. I did not find a real easy way, but one way which does not seem too hard to implement would be to introduce one additional tag in a package named something like VendorRelease. Then, given package A and B we could implement the "what is newer" comparison as follows: A.Vendor <=> B.Vendor || A.VendorRelease <=> B.VendorRelease || A.Epoch <=> B.Epoch || A.Version <=> B.Version || A.Release <=> B.Release The VendorRelease, Epoch, Version and Release would be implemented using the usual, current comparison method. The Vendor comparison would be taken from a config file, where the admin can decide what is the preferred Vendor tag. We might thus be able to solve the old dispute of having repotags by punting it into the hands of the user. If the user is happy to take newer versioned packages from some third party repo, he can just define both Vendors as equal in the config file. This would also allow getting rid of Epochs from one Fedora release to the next, since a newer VendorRelease would trump the non-null Epoch. I'm a bit afraid this might degenerate into another flame fest, but having slept on it I still think this idea has some merit. So putting on my asbestos underpants and waiting to see what will come out of this... Cheers, Christian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
