New Kernel - athlon - Mozilla

Mon Sep 8 19:02:01 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.  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?  Version numbers
> shouldn't go back without a very good reason, IMHO.

version numbers go back quite often during beta cycle for various
reasons.  We don't EVER use epoch in ANY packages except to work
around bugs in released versions of packages that cannot be worked
around in ANY other way.  It's a horrible, disgusting hack that
ends up infecting any other package with dependencies.

Blame this one one me (I missed mentioning to Dave he should change
it while rebasing).

michaelkjohnson

 "He that composes himself is wiser than he that composes a book."
 Linux Application Development                     -- Ben Franklin
 http://people.redhat.com/johnsonm/lad/