2009/1/24 Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx>: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 15:42:20 -0500, > Christopher Beland <beland@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> So I just closed bug 476375, which concerned a problem with Fedora 11 >> Rawhide having a lower version number than Fedora 10. But if someone >> releases an update to Fedora 10 with a higher Epoch-Version-Release >> number, this could crop up again, and I wouldn't notice it because I >> only run the upgrade once. I notice here: >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/ReleaseCriteria >> >> that these EVR bugs are considered release blockers. I would feel a bit >> more comfortable about closing this bug if I knew that any future >> manifestation would be caught by a systematic check. I've heard mention >> that there used to be a script that checked for this sort of thing, but >> after all the infrastructure changes, it's offline. I heard there was >> some sort of controversy about what it should do; is there any movement >> on getting that ironed out, or is it still stalled? > > I had filed an RFE (478697) about this a few weeks ago. James Antill posted > a sample script as an attachment to the bug. > > -- > fedora-test-list mailing list > fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list > Just to point that this is very important. I always do a fresh install on new releases and after a while I enable the rawhide repos and do a 'yum update' and this is very annoying almost every time because of EVR bugs. There are numerous other use cases where EVR bugs really annoy people a lot of them were discussed in this list so no point to bring them out. I don't blame the packagers since some maintain 50+ packages and it's quite hard to sync all of them for rawhide, the updates-testing and updates for the previous two releases. So some automatic check will be very nice. -- NV -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
