Heads up: NoArch Sub Packages Feature continues
Ben Boeckel
MathStuf at gmail.com
Mon Jun 15 19:30:11 UTC 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Seth Vidal wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Rex Dieter wrote:
>
>> Seth Vidal wrote:
>>
>>> It's not about the upgrade process. It is only about
compare_providers.
>>>
>>> You have 3 pkgs providing 'foo'
>>>
>>> foo-1.1.noarch
>>> foo-1.0.x86_64
>>> foo-1.0.i386
>>>
>>> Which one do you pick on x86_64 or i686?
>>>
>>> We weight extra toward pkgs in the same arch as the running
system. And
>>> then the arch NEAREST to the running arch.
>>
>> Maybe I'm just being naive, but I'd expect a newer EVR to
trump any arch
>> weighting.
>
> really?
>
> So if you're on x86_64
>
> and you have foo-1.1.i386 and foo-1.0.x86_64
>
> and you run:
>
> yum install foo
>
> you would expect foo-1.1.i386 to be installed instead of
foo-1.0.x86_64?
>
> REALLY?
>
> -sv
A special exemption for noarch in arch compares and version
differences? If it's between some arch and noarch, defer to the
version checker.
- --Ben
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEUEARECAAYFAko2oUMACgkQiPi+MRHG3qThCACgsf8PKu/aJKNw1KO7vvRkN3fL
KZAAl3gMbcnFvyfFykH3lUOLzzE0ndQ=
=B/QM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel
mailing list