On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> Questions:
>
> 1. Is there a rpm package distributor that identifies which version of
> rpm was used to build the packages? Who?
Doesn't matter, the rpm package itself is binary compatible between version 3
and 4. (See the list archieves on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> Questions:
>
> 1. Is there a rpm package distributor that identifies which
version of
> rpm was used to build the packages? Who?
Doesn't matter, the rpm package itself is binary compatible between
version 3
and 4. (See
On 03 Feb 2001 19:30:26 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > Questions:
> > >
> > > 1. Is there a rpm package distributor that identifies which version of
> > > rpm was used to build the packages? Who?
>
On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> If that is the case, please explain the following error message to me, and
> how I
> correct it. Several other people have said I need to upgrade to rpm-4.0, or
> perhaps only 3.0.5 or 3.0.6. I get this error with both 3.0.3 and 3.0.5.
>
> The
Bill Piety wrote:
On 03 Feb 2001 19:30:26 +, Richard -Gilligan-
Uschold wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > Questions:
> > >
> > > 1. Is there a rpm package distributor that identifies which
version of
> > > rpm was used to build the
On 04 Feb 2001 01:18:55 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> Bill Piety wrote:
>
> > On 03 Feb 2001 19:30:26 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > > > Questions:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Is
Bill Piety wrote:
On 04 Feb 2001 01:18:55 +, Richard -Gilligan-
Uschold wrote:
> Bill Piety wrote:
>
> > On 03 Feb 2001 19:30:26 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 03-Feb-2001 Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > > > Questions:
> > > >
On 04 Feb 2001 05:04:47 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> Bill Piety wrote:
>
> > On 04 Feb 2001 01:18:55 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > Bill Piety wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 03 Feb 2001 19:30:26 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
Bill Piety wrote:
On 04 Feb 2001 05:04:47 +, Richard -Gilligan-
Uschold wrote:
> Bill Piety wrote:
>
...
>
> I did most of this from kpackage, except the --rebuilddb, and where
noted.
> Here's what I did:
>
> ignore: rpm-3.0.3-5x.i386.rpm kpackage doesn't
display, older than 3.0.3-43mdk
>
On 04 Feb 2001 21:46:32 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> Bill Piety wrote:
>
> > On 04 Feb 2001 05:04:47 +, Richard -Gilligan- Uschold wrote:
> > > Bill Piety wrote:
> > >
>
> ...
>
> > >
> > > I did most of this from kpackage, except the --rebuilddb, and where noted.
> > > Here's
10 matches
Mail list logo