On Sat, 13 Mar 2004, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> Dnia Saturday 13 of March 2004 17:40, Mike A. Harris napisa?:
> > >Or perhaps because you don't use Epoch while you should.
> >
> > Epoch causes it's own problems, and should be avoided at all
> > costs. Yes, it does fix these types of situations, but at the
> > cost of creating permanent Epoch issues.
> Could you elaborate? I have Epoch in over 700 spec files without any
> (non-human) problems.
Imagine you make package foo with epoch 10 and version 1.3.1 which has a
seperate devel package.
This works great just fine for you I guess.
But if I dedice to package bar and it requires bar 1.3.1 I would use:
Requires: foo = 1.3.1
But any user will notice a dependency error like:
bar-1.2.4 requires foo-1.3.1
A normal user will shout out some insults to his/her system about this
stupid error.
I would need to dig up this epoch number and make a package with:
Requires: foo = 10:1.3.1
But how is a normal user to know how to handle these errors?
So in my view the Epoch field is a pain to great to inflict normal usees
with. It breaks dependencies in a way a normal user simply can't
comprehend because the user will not see the Epoch information anywhere.
Hugo.
--
All email sent to me is bound to the rules described on my homepage.
hvdkooij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://hvdkooij.xs4all.nl/
Don't meddle in the affairs of sysadmins,
for they are subtle and quick to anger.
