On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Jeff Johnson <n3...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 25, 2011, at 12:08 PM, Matthew Dawkins wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Matthew Dawkins <matty...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I recently updated my snapshot of 5.2 to build around a perl upgrade to
>> 5.12.2, but I didn't expect any problems really.
>> Well pkgs that have requires like the following:
>> Provides: libpq = %{version}-%{release}
>>
>> now also have this half distepoch after it :2011.1
>>
>> made with a newer rpm5.2 snapshot
>> rpm -qp --provides lib64pq8.4_5-8.4.5-3-
>> unity2011.0.x86_64.rpm
>> postgresql-libs = 8.4.5-3
>> libpq = 8.4.5-3
>> lib64pq8.4_5-virtual = 8.4
>> libpq.so.5()(64bit)
>> *lib64pq8.4_5 = 8.4.5-3:2011.0*
>>
>> made with the older rpm5.2 snapshot
>> rpm -qp --provides lib64pq8.4_5-8.4.4-3-unity2010.x86_64.rpm
>> postgresql-libs = 8.4.4-3
>> libpq = 8.4.4-3
>> lib64pq8.4_5-virtual = 8.4
>> libpq.so.5()(64bit)
>> *lib64pq8.4_5 = 8.4.4-3*
>>
>
>
> Funny how I get no responses on this problem..... It looks pretty familiar
> to what's being reported on cooker.... hmmm
>
>
> Well have a response for free ;-)
>
> What I cannot do is solve a legacy compatibility issue because rpm-4.6.1
> just ain't
> my problem mon. Similarly, I cannot dictate what solution is appropriate
> for Mandriva
> and Unity.
>
> 73 de Jeff
>
Unity != Mandriva
The problem for Unity was that smart doesn't support it, nor does createrepo
(i'm guessing)
A courtesy response is nice otherwise it feels like we are just getting
ignored for the better, more well planned mother project. It seems testing
and error report checking are a big todo there too!
I can't think of another project that has used and deployed rpm5 more and
our experiences are still chucked to the side like rubbish. TY
Cheers,
Matt
