Seems I inadvertantly introduced an epoch with in filelight-4.7.90-1, which was flagged during a reviewing this package for inclusion in fedora.
In the meantime, I've filelight passed review and imported into fedora without the epoch as filelight-4.7.90-2. I rebuilt this and put into kde-unstable too.
I mention all this because the removal of epoch means for those of you using the f16 kde-unstable repo, upgrading the package away from -1 requires manual intervention.
My suggestion would be something like:
(make sure you're current): yum update then, yum distro-sync filelight
-- rex
Rex Dieter wrote:
Seems I inadvertantly introduced an epoch with in filelight-4.7.90-1, which was flagged during a reviewing this package for inclusion in fedora.
In the meantime, I've filelight passed review and imported into fedora without the epoch as filelight-4.7.90-2. I rebuilt this and put into kde-unstable too.
I mention all this because the removal of epoch means for those of you using the f16 kde-unstable repo, upgrading the package away from -1 requires manual intervention.
My suggestion would be something like:
(make sure you're current): yum update then, yum distro-sync filelight
Are you sure you mean fedora 16, Rex?
I looked in kde-redhat and there is no filelight-4.7.90-2.
Then, I tried running yum distro-sync filelight and it tries to downgrade filelight-4.7.90-1 to kdeutils-filelight-4.7.4-1.
On 12/22/2011 10:40 PM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Seems I inadvertantly introduced an epoch with in filelight-4.7.90-1, which was flagged during a reviewing this package for inclusion in fedora.
In the meantime, I've filelight passed review and imported into fedora without the epoch as filelight-4.7.90-2. I rebuilt this and put into kde-unstable too.
I mention all this because the removal of epoch means for those of you using the f16 kde-unstable repo, upgrading the package away from -1 requires manual intervention.
My suggestion would be something like:
(make sure you're current): yum update then, yum distro-sync filelight
Are you sure you mean fedora 16, Rex?
I looked in kde-redhat and there is no filelight-4.7.90-2.
Then, I tried running yum distro-sync filelight and it tries to downgrade filelight-4.7.90-1 to kdeutils-filelight-4.7.4-1.
strange? my repo push logs include filelight-4.7.90-2 getting pushed, but it is indeed not there. Rebuilding again now I guess.
On 12/23/2011 07:25 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
Then, I tried running yum distro-sync filelight and it tries to downgrade filelight-4.7.90-1 to kdeutils-filelight-4.7.4-1.
strange? my repo push logs include filelight-4.7.90-2 getting pushed, but it is indeed not there. Rebuilding again now I guess.
Heh, I think I know what happened. I naively ran repomanage to delete older builds, and it was smart enough to know that filelight-4.7.90-1 (with epoch) was newer than filelight-4.7.90-2 , and helpfully deleted my newer build.
so, not to be fooled twice, I manually deleted 4.7.90-1 from the repo this time, to make way for the new 4.7.90-2 build this time.
-- rex
Rex Dieter wrote:
Heh, I think I know what happened. I naively ran repomanage to delete older builds, and it was smart enough to know that filelight-4.7.90-1 (with epoch) was newer than filelight-4.7.90-2 , and helpfully deleted my newer build.
Technology is always at our side ;-)
On 23/12/11 12:46 PM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
Rex Dieter wrote:
Heh, I think I know what happened. I naively ran repomanage to delete older builds, and it was smart enough to know that filelight-4.7.90-1 (with epoch) was newer than filelight-4.7.90-2 , and helpfully deleted my newer build.
Technology is always at our side ;-)
Just not necessarily *on* our side :-)
poc
Rex Dieter wrote:
Seems I inadvertantly introduced an epoch with in filelight-4.7.90-1, which was flagged during a reviewing this package for inclusion in fedora.
In the meantime, I've filelight passed review and imported into fedora without the epoch as filelight-4.7.90-2. I rebuilt this and put into kde-unstable too.
FYI, it turns out the standalone filelight packages already had Epoch 1, so we're now readding the Epoch, making the above issue moot.
Kevin Kofler
-
Kevin Kofler -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Peter G. -
Rex Dieter