On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 08:38 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 13:28 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote: > > seth vidal wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 09:58 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote: > > >> Hi. > > >> > > >> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:44:16 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > > >> > > >>> If the old one is still there then it still obsoletes tracker. > > >> So if I have packages A and B, where B obsoletes A. Now there is a rpm-newer > > >> version of B (B-new) in another repo (updates) which no longer obsoletes A. > > >> > > >> So as long as B exists anywhere I can not install A using yum, because > > >> yum still considers the obsolete from B, even though it is no longer relevant > > >> in any way? > > > > > > When I was working on the obs vs updates code I kept asking about this. > > > The answer I repeatedly got was that obsoletes trumps updates no matter > > > what. > > > > Was there a reason given for this? What breaks if it's the other way around? > > mainly that an obsoleted package should stay obsoleted. > Having said that I'm inclined to agree that older pkgs shouldn't be included but I was going along with opinion at that time. -sv -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
