Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 21:17 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 23:34 -0400, Russell Harrison wrote:
Out of curiosity,
Assuming that the current extras package was renamed would it only be
implemented in the current development / future versions? Using RPM
how would we go about upgrading the current package to the new name.
Using obsoletes would work initially to replace it if there wasn't a
new package coming in with the same name. That would then cause
anyone installing emacs-muse after muse to have their muse package
removed.
What is the proper way of doing this? My understanding of RPM leads
me to believe that the "cleanest" way to include the new muse package
in FC5 is for its package to be renamed, even though the current
package is the "proper" candidate for renaming. The other option is
to change the names for FC6+ and call it done.
Am I right about this or is there a mechanism I'm unaware of?
I think (not sure) you can have emacs-muse obsolete specific versions
ranges of muse, but I'm not positive.
Personally - I say do the emacs-muse thing now, as in yesterday, with
obsolete/provides for muse.
Then in FC-6/devel, drop the obsolete/provides.
FC-5 users will have muse replaced with emacs-muse and then when fc-6 is
released, they will get an emacs-muse that does not obsolete muse - and
can install this other package.
People trying to yum update from FC-4 to FC-6 really should make a pit
stop in FC-5 first anyhow.
It is regretful that the existing (emacs) muse version is 3.02.6b is
higher than the (sequencer/audio recorder) muse version (0.8.1a).
Which means that fc5 Planet CCRMA users would not be able to install
(audio) muse as emacs-muse would obsolete it, right?
Unless emacs-muse obsoletes just the current version of muse in extras.
Do I dare suggest that this might be a place where using an epoch might
be justified?
-Quentin
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
