So what shall I do? Volker
Am Freitag 27 Mai 2011, 22:56:44 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen: > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 14:50, Orion Poplawski <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 05/27/2011 02:28 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > >> 2011/5/27 Volker Fröhlich<[email protected]>: > >>> Dear list reader! > >>> > >>> There is no xerces-c for PPC in RHEL 6. It builds fine, nevertheless, > >>> so I > >>> volunteered to maintain it for PPC in EPEL 6. I took exactly the same > >>> spec file > >>> as RHEL 6 uses, but bumped the release, as I changed the spec to build > >>> for > >>> this exclusive architecture. > >> > >> Hmmm I am wondering. For things that aren't in an OS but may show up > >> there.. should we unbump the release number so that RHEL updates win > >> any war? As in if it is xerces-c-3.1459-8.ppc the EPEL one should be > >> xerces-c-3.1459-7.9.ppc ? > > > > I think the release numbers should be exactly the same. > > Originally I agreed to that.. but after complaints wondered if there > was a better solution. > > The reason I asked was sometimes when RHEL adds something into a > release, they may not bump the numbers so a person could have an EPEL > version of xerces-c and not get upgraded at 6.(n+1) to RHEL's version. > People have complained about that in the past (I think). _______________________________________________ epel-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
