On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:30:33 -0800, Adam wrote: > On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 18:07 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:16:39 -0800, Adam wrote: > > > > > I was going to suggest what seems an obvious alternative way to do what > > > Christian wants, without changing anything in rpm. Instead of: > > > > > > foobar-1.0-1.fc12.x86-64 > > > > > > have: > > > > > > foobar-fc12-1.0-1.x86-64 > > > > Insufficient. > > > > Making %dist most-significant is only sufficient for ordinary %dist > > upgrades, but doesn't replace everything %epoch is needed for: fixing > > issues with upstream versioning schemes, reverting accidental upgrades, > > resetting %version as a result of software project splits. > > I didn't mean it as a replacement for epoch, I meant it as a way of > handling the initial problem. Of course, it has problems in that regard > too, which is why I don't actually support doing anything like this. You said "without changing anything in rpm". How that? If you move anything like "fc12" (using a '-' bears a risk) into %version makes it necessary to consider the change value in all versioned dependencies, too. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
