On Thursday, 10 March 2005, at 10:12:26 (+0100), Toralf Lund wrote: > Yes, it's difficult to guarantee a smooth transition from an rpm > made by a different packager if you're not familiar with the > versioning scheme of that packager. Or even if you are. > That's not a problem unique to Epoch, however - you get the same > issue with Release and also to a certain extent Version This is not even close to a fair comparison. Versions are defined by the package, and in no way can a particular release number cause a lower version to be preferred over a higher one. Only an epoch can cause such a fiasco. > (for instance, your perl 5.00503 could easily be given different rpm > versions by different packagers.) Yes, but packagers who do such things are making a fundamental packaging error. Much like using epoch, actually... :-) > And saying no to a smooth transition between rpm versions *from the > same packager* because you want to try to get a smooth transition > between different packager's rpms, is rather dumb, IMO. This belief shows a distinct lack of forward thinking. There are other ways to provide smooth transition that do not require maintenance for the entire lifespan of that package. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <mej@xxxxxxxxx> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "I always wait until a jury has spoken before I anticipate what they will do." -- US Attorney General Janet Reno _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
