On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 12:17:02PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:28:10 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> >
> > I suggest hardcoding the %{dist} to what it was when the package was
> > merged (so I guess it is fc7 here). For the fc6 and fc5 packages it
> > is not as clear, but I guess that using fc7 too would be safer.
>
> Questionable, albeit would serve as an ugly work-around. It would defeat
> the purpose of the dist tag, since if you reused the spec for multiple
> branches, it would make the fc5 package obsolete an fc7 package.
Indeed, that's why I think what to do isn't really clear. 2 points
if favor of having fc7 in all the specs is that it is really the 'latest'
version shipped in fedora, and it can be the same for all the branches.
Using %{dist} will get wrong when it becomes fc8.
Maybe a solution could be to skip a release and obsolete that release
without dist tag. For example:
foo-0-4%{?dist} is the latest version with the subpackage foo-sub.
next package is foo-0-6%{?dist} and in this package and above there is
Obsolete: foo-sub <= 0-5
Maybe another possibility could be to use
Obsoletes: ettercap-plugins < 0.7.3-15
Would that work?
--
Pat
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
