Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478504 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-12 08:30:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #10) > Imagine this: > /usr/lib/epiphany > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.22 > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.22/extensions/gget.py* > > When epiphany gets updated to 2.23 we have: > /usr/lib/epiphany (unowned) > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.22 (unowned) > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.22/extensions/gget.py* (unowned) > /usr/lib/epiphany > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.23 > /usr/lib/epiphany/2.23/extensions Well, - As when epiphany is upgrade from 2.22 to 2.23, then I guess gget-epiphany-extension will no longer work (although I don't know this package well) unless gget is rebuilt against new epiphany. i.e. if epiphany can be upgraded without gget-epiphany-extension is rebuilt, it is _already_ wrong. Not-rebuilt gget-epiphany-extension should prevent epiphany from being upgraded in such a case (theoretically). Some idea: - Add "Conflicts: epiphany >= 2.23" "Conflicts: epiphany < 2.22" - Ask epiphany maintainer to support "Provides: epiphany(abi) = 2.22", for example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review