On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 21:53 +0200, Achim Gratz wrote: > Yaakov Selkowitz writes: > > In short, xdelta was updated from 1.x to 3.x, then it was realized that > > both were needed, and so xdelta was reverted to 1.x and xdelta3 was > > created. Instead of saying "oh btw you need to revert xdelta to 1.x > > yourself" (which is all we could do currently), the solution would be to > > bump epoch on xdelta-1.x, which would force it to be considered newer > > than the short-lived xdelta-3.x by both upset and setup. > > Once you've used an epoch-extended version you'd be forced to always use > it, however.
Correct, just like with RPM. > I think this is creating more problems than it solves Such as? > and I don't see why any of you would like the idea. Because it is a well-established solution for the same issue on other platforms. -- Yaakov