Fedora 11 Mass Rebuilds

[Panu Matilainen]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Bill Crawford wrote:

> On Thursday 26 February 2009 16:12:27 Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>> We take compatibility dead seriously, but there are very real limits to
>> what can be done compatibly and what can be be reasonably backported, if
>> possible at all. The strong hash support might be within possibilities but
>> already in rpm 4.6.0 the large package support is something that is
>> *impossible* to backport due to the required API/ABI changes.
>
> Isn't there a) a version number in the header, and b) the possibility of one of
> those rpmlib(Foo) == 111 requires being added? At least one source rpm I
> grabbed to look at fails to install on an older system, but there's no warning
> at all before you get these checksum errors.
>
> Better to fail with a warning that some new feature is required?

There is a rpmlib() dependency on the strong hash support, but the 
rpmlib() dependency mechanism is a bit backwards which prevents the it 
from working in this particular case (from 4.6.0-rc to 4.6.0-final) :-/

 	- Panu -