New Kernel - athlon - Mozilla
Dave Jones
davej at redhat.com
Mon Sep 8 12:48:21 UTC 2003
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:19:55AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Unless there's an epoch that makes it look newer, this will indeed be
> the case.
We can't/don't/won't use epoch in the kernel rpm.
I'm not clear on the reasons, but Arjan turned a funny colour when
I suggested the same.
> I don't see the point of this change though. Why not cal
> it 2.4.22-21.whatever or 20.2030, or even 20.1.2030, such that it is
> clearly newer than the already-released kernel?
because that number makes no sense to have in the revision string any more.
> Version numbers shouldn't go back without a very good reason, IMHO.
Welcome to rawhide. The fix is simple in this case at least, and doesn't
break anything. *ponder*, how will the installer handle this if someone
tries to update a beta1 install with a beta2 CD when that appears ?
Dave
--
Dave Jones http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
More information about the test
mailing list