Michael Schwendt (mschwendt.tmp0701.nospam@xxxxxxxx) said:
> A technical reason for avoiding Epochs is that at the RPM level, the
> software version of a package is not independent from the package
> version. When adding an Epoch to a package, the Epoch becomes a necessary
> part of all forms of RPM version comparison. This introduces weaknesses in
> non-automatic versioned dependencies and requires packagers to specify the
> exact %{epoch} in all such dependencies to keep them strict.
>
> Example:
>
> Name: bar
> Requires: foo >= 1.0
>
> would be satisfied by
>
> Name: foo
> Version: 0.5
> Epoch: 1
>
> because due to the Epoch, the smaller %version wins RPM version comparison.
However, these can be queried and accounted for when an epoch is
introduced. I'd agree with David - if we *can* make the upgrade path
clean, we should. Sometimes, there will be things that fail (horribly
broken %pre/%post scripts), but if the solution is clean (and adding
epoch where needed is clean), we should do it.
Bill
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
