On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 20:20 -0800, Conrad Meyer wrote:
On Saturday 20 February 2010 06:03:28 pm Braden McDaniel wrote:
> I guess I should properly read the headings... I guess I misunderstood
> where this was going from your summary.
> If I understand it correctly, it's telling me that a F12 that hasn't
> been updated will have problems being upgraded to F13. Certainly that's
> not ideal; but it doesn't strike me as exactly tragic, either. How
> important is this considered, generally?
> I'm not crystal clear on why this is broken, either. It may have
> something to do with the fact that the openvrml binary RPM changed to
> being a metapackage; but the implication of Boost is a bit confounding.
The ratio of "badness" to the difficulty of fixing it is fairly high. Fixing
it is fairly trivial. Leaving it broken breaks upgrades for users who upgrade
distributions using yum update -- which, though it isn't supported, is
I'm happy to fix it if I can figure out what's broken.
The solution varies somewhat depending on how broken it is; I'll
describe all possible problems / solutions. There's going to be a lot of text
here, but nothing hard to do.
If the F-12 package has a higher Epoch than the F-13 package, this is *very*
broken, but can be fixed by bumping the F-13 Epoch to at least the F-12 Epoch.
That's not it.
If the F-12 package has a higher Version than the F-13 package and
Epoch, this is probably broken.
Also not it.
If the F-12 package has the same-or-lower Epoch and the same version,
higher Release, then a couple things may be wrong:
I think that's everything. Let me know if you have any questions,
or if I'm
I'm afraid I'm still at a loss.
Braden McDaniel <braden(a)endoframe.com>