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

Re: Tracker?



On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 08:38 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 13:28 +0000, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > seth vidal wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-11-13 at 09:58 +0100, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> > >> Hi.
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:44:16 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> If the old one is still there then it still obsoletes tracker.
> > >> So if I have packages A and B, where B obsoletes A. Now there is a rpm-newer
> > >> version of B (B-new) in another repo (updates) which no longer obsoletes A.
> > >>
> > >> So as long as B exists anywhere I can not install A using yum, because
> > >> yum still considers the obsolete from B, even though it is no longer relevant
> > >> in any way?
> > > 
> > > When I was working on the obs vs updates code I kept asking about this.
> > > The answer I repeatedly got was that obsoletes trumps updates no matter
> > > what.
> > 
> > Was there a reason given for this? What breaks if it's the other way around?
> 
> mainly that an obsoleted package should stay obsoleted.
> 

Having said that I'm inclined to agree that older pkgs shouldn't be
included but I was going along with opinion at that time.

-sv



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