Fedora and Fedora Legacy package versioning schemes

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 01:08:26AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote:
> Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> 
> >Le lun 06/10/2003 à 12:13, Axel Thimm a écrit :
> >
> >>On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:39:16AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Anyway, the presence of this bug prohibits mixing numerical and
> >>alphabetical segments in rpm comparision for any system running an rpm
> >>from before 2003, unless rpm is upgraded to a version without this bug
> >>before any other upgrading operation.
> >>
> >>Therefore IMHO mixing numerical and alphabetical segments in
> >>comparisons should be avoided for legacy considerations.
> >
> >
> >At one point you should consider if providing a fixed rpm version for
> >all affected systems and have all updates depend on this rpm version is
> >not easier than trying to come with the perfect backwards-compatible
> >macro.
> >
> +1
> Exactly.  And given rpm-4.1 from RH8 as an example, why would anyone 
> WANT to not upgrade it... =)

Then why isn't is offered on RHN?
-- 
Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20031006/d25260eb/attachment.sig>