Re: Dependency problem with fc4 updates?

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

 



On 12/10/05, Neal Becker <ndbecker2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Sorry, then.  I assumed it was part of core or extras, because as you could
> see in the message, it didn't have a suffix on the package.

There is no requirement that 3rd parties provide a suffix. Even if
there were such a requirement it would be impossible to enforce.  If
this sort of thing is going to continue to confuse you, I suggest you
check the Vendor/Packager tag and the gpg signature for that gsm-devel
package to determine who made that package, and contact the packager
and tell them that you prefer it if they continued to use a suffix in
the release field.

-jef

-- 
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

[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