[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RFC: Soname in rpm name



On Tue, January 25, 2005 10:11 am, seth vidal said:
>> Where are such strict semantics of the "Obsoletes" field defined?
>>
>> Isn't it rather free to use? As in "we don't need that package
>> any longer, it's obsolete and can be erased"?
>>
>> If, for instance, functionality of one package is supplied by another
>> package, that's not a rename, but a relocation of package
>> capabilities. Package "foo" would "Obsoletes: bar <= 1.0". If an old
>> library API/ABI is not used anymore and hence considered obsolete, a
>> new version of the library could "Obsolete: libfoo <= 0.9" just fine.
>
> Actually I was expressing my opinion on how I think it should be used.
>
> that's why I said 'should'
>

Is there a good reason it shouldn't be used to mark packages as obsoleting
others?
If so, what is it?

Sean




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]