On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 05:36:37PM -0500, Michael Jennings wrote: > On Friday, 11 March 2005, at 20:11:43 (+1300), > Darryl Dixon wrote: > > > Aha! Now I understand. So your primary objection to epoch is that > > it overrides sane versioning practises > > Exactly. It allows a package of an inferior version to upgrade (read: > replace) a package of a superior version and to allow a package of an > inferior version to prevent updating to a superior version. But it is necessary. I maintain local versions of vendor rpms (because so much code is broken). The only way that I can prevent a future vendor rpm version from updating my version, sanely, is to use Epoch. It is *meant* to override standard versioning practices. /fc _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
