On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 20:44 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > On 18/05/06, Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Yep, no, respectively. > > > > Not sure of the wisdom of the Obsoltes/Provides: muse, since part of the > > point of this discussion was the name collision with something else > > named muse. > > Yeah, I was concerned about that - but I think this is the only way to > deal with the upgrade path. And I thought that we had (more or less) > settled on using an epoch for the other muse package to avoid > problems. Am I missing something ? Epochs just trump version/release numbers, that's all. E.g. foo epoch 1 version 0.00001 is "later" as far as rpm is concerned than foo epoch 0 version 15.7. If you obsolete "muse" (unversioned), all packages of that name will go, regardless of their epoch. Paul. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
