Re: RPM version goes backward in Rawhide

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 13:24 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: 
> On 7/26/11 1:14 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > Yes, It got untagged. See last week's thread on this list:
> > Subject: rpm builds failing with "Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found"
> 
> I thought there was a hard rule about not having nvrs go backwards, and 
> if a bad build was put out, it should be fixed with epoch or other such 
> NVR things to make sure the upgrade path continues.  (that is once a 
> build makes it out in the nightly repos)

I do not think it was so hard rule for rawhide - it depended on various
things whether it was needed or not.
-- 
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
                                              Turkish proverb

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux