Improve the way rpm decides what is newer

Jesse Keating jkeating at j2solutions.net
Sat Nov 21 15:23:08 UTC 2009



On Nov 21, 2009, at 1:38, drago01 <drago01 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Adam Williamson  
> <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 00:58 +0100, Christian Iseli wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I also got bitten by the "FC11 packages 'newer' than FC12" hickup,  
>>> and
>>> while going through the yum remove/add maneuver I pondered:
>>> - is there ever a time when, while upgrading from Fedora n to Fedora
>>>   n+1 I would expect a package .fcn to be kept instead of getting
>>>   the .fcn+1 instance ?
>>> My answer was: no
>>>
>>> So I wondered if there would be a simple way to make this happen
>>> regardless of whether a maintainer blunders and gets things slightly
>>> out of sync between the 2 or 3 current Fedora releases.
>>
>> To me, this is the wrong fix. The problem here isn't RPM's version
>> comparison logic, which is perfectly sound. Instead of nerfing up RPM
>> comparisons, which are already full of enough hidden mines, we should
>> just improve Fedora's package versioning conventions so this doesn't
>> happen, or at least happens less often.
>
> We should just use release epochs, people might hate them for whatever
> reasons, but they would easily prevent such issues from happing.
>

Which sounds great until 3.0.1 goes out on f11 while 2.5 is out on  
f12. Really don't want to see that "upgrade" happen.

--
Jes




More information about the devel mailing list