Perhaps, should be most useful to post question as this, interesting as they are, on the rpm mailing list. Just an opinion. Regards -----Original Message----- From: Petr Pisar Sent: 21/02/2011, 16:43 To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: rpm's treatment of unversioned provides On 2011-02-21, Paul Howarth <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > RPM traditionally treats unversioned provides as meaning "any version". > Over on perl-devel list, it's been suggested that this is a bug in rpm. > > Googling around, I can't find any specific rationale for why rpm does > this as opposed to say providing version 0. Can anybody enlighten me? > The full story begins on <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246#c7>. I'm really interrested why RPM dependecny solver behaves like Paul says and what it is good for. -- Petr -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
