On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 23:48 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 15:29:37 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > On Tue, 2006-06-20 at 09:35 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > > > Thanks. I'm pretty sure the "bug" isn't as bad as I originally described. > > > Last I knew, however, was that yum did prefer an older "real" pkg over a > > > newer "Provides:" one. > > > > Here is the scoop. > > > > you have 'foo-0:2.4.6-1' as a package. You then create 'foobar-0:1.2-3' > > which has Obsoletes: foo; Provides: foo. 'foo' is left in the > > repository. > > > > 'yum install foo' will find the package 'foo' and install that instead > > of 'foobar'. This is by design according to Seth when I last talked to > > him about it. Because you are asking for the package name not a > > provides. The package itself would have to be removed from the > > repository. > > > > Seth, is this still true? I don't want to speak for you. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/190116 yep - seems to be in NEEDINFO state. but it works for me just fine. I believe yum in cvs and soon to be in rawhide fixes it. -sv -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
