Re: question about epoch

[Mihai Maties <mihai xcyb org>]

On Saturday 03 January 2004 22:12, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 09:11:47AM +1300, Michael Honeyfield wrote:
> > > > foo = 12:1.0-17
> > > > foo = 0:2.0-1
> > >
> > > Zero is before 12. So, stuck forever.
> >
> > so with and increased version number the damage inflicted by epochs has
> > to stay? Just making sure I understand.
>
> Yeah. Because otherwise, how would RPM know that epoch-less package X was
> supposed to be before or after the epoch'd ones?

A package with a missing Epoch is considered to have epoch=0, so actually no 
package is "epoch-less"...


Mihai