On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 16:31:18 <ignatenkobrain> hyperv-daemons-license-0-0.15.20160728git.fc26.noarch > > Only looking at that, what's wrong with it? It seems to adhere to Fedora's > pre-release snapshot scheme with no known %version. > >> 16:31:18 <ignatenkobrain> kernel-modules-4.8.0-0.rc4.git3.1.fc26.x86_64 >> 16:31:18 <ignatenkobrain> arpack-3.3.0-2.b0f7a60git.fc24.x86_64 >> 16:31:18 <ignatenkobrain> python3-iscsi-initiator-utils-6.2.0.873-34.git4c1f2d9.fc25.x86_64 > >> 16:31:46 <ignatenkobrain> it's jsut 4 packages out of thousands which are packaged wrongly because packagers do not understand what they should do > > More often, it is ignorance. Packagers, who "do not understand what they > should do" as you put it, ought to ask about it. Preferably, in advance. > However, I doubt the packagers are aware of the RPM Version Comparison > pitfalls. As part of allowing tilde I described in same page how RPM Version Comparison works. > > Even the cases above don't result in update problems, if the next update > bumps %version or %release in a good way. At most there would be > inaccurate versioned dependencies, which either are superfluous or not > happy about the changes introduced by the snapshots. > > A few times per year you can experience upgrade problems where packagers > didn't even notice that their latest builds don't replace the previously > released builds. And once the issue is discovered, don't be surprised if > Epoch gets bumped without any concerns. > > It would be a better idea to run a bot and check koji builds for problematic > EVRs (and versioned package inter-dependencies) early. I do it from time to time semi-manually ;) > -- > packaging mailing list > packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- -Igor Gnatenko -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
