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

Re: Why do we need FC version attached to the package name?

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:01:29PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 19:08:11 -0400, Dave wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 04:56:07PM -0600, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
>>  > I *wish* it made a difference. I did an upgrade am an left with a host 
>>  > of fc10 packages because the fc11 ones weren't considered newer.
>>  > 
>>  > For example people with updates-testing enabled on fc10 got a 
>>  > non-upgraded yum because the versions were the same (except for 
>>  > fc10/fc11) and it stopped working because python went from 2.5 to 2.6.
>> That's messed up. We used to check just before release time that this
>> situation never occured.
>            ^^^^^
>Even later there used to be another script that queried koji for more
>accurate package release versions, but it has never been run regularly,
>not even prior to the next Fedora release.

Yep.  It still exists and can be run.

>>  It should probably be added to the rel-eng
>> release checklist if it isn't there already.
>Does rel-eng have any interest at all in avoiding some upgrade path
>problems?  I don't see that. Running a script to catch _some_ issues would

While you might not see it, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  I used to run
the script myself.  Lately, I have both forgotten and had little time to do so.
I can try and poke at it again.


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