On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:38:41 -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 13:28 -0600, Brian Millett wrote:
>
> > Results follow:
> > .....
> > --> Running transaction check
> > --> Processing Dependency: aalib = %{epoch}:1.4.0-0.rc5.2 for package:
> > aalib-devel
> > ValueError: invalid literal for long(): %{epoch}
>
> Looks like garbage in the epoch field of aalib.
>
> I'll take a look at both yum and the pkg.
>
> could you open a bug on this?
Not necessary. Ran into it, too. Spec was bad. Epoch was dropped, but
%epoch still used. Fixed.
Ah, sweet irony.
http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/2003-April/000795.html
http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/2003-May/001396.html
http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/2003-June/001422.html
Especially, that last thread indicates almost everyone was against
mandatory epochs.
-- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com,
http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]