On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 10:19:15 -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 11:24 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
>1. Look on the fedora-packaging list for the discussion
>2. my guess is:
> a. if the fedora.us package had a non-zero epoch it needs to be
>maintained - just so users have an upgrade path
> b. if the fedora.us package had an Epoch: 0 drop it and remove
>%{epoch} from anyplace you have it in ver strings.
I agree with this. Anyone else have thoughts?
Dropping "Epoch: 0" breaks rpm -F updates. This is in bugzilla
somewhere.