Re: Package epochs and broken upgrades
On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 08:15, Ben Burton wrote:
> > > Perhaps I should just bite the bullet and put a 4: epoch on all of the
> > > packages that are going into sid. Though in general there have been so
> >
> > Yes, that is the best thing to do.
>
> Yep, I'm going to do that. After all, our users are our priority, etc
> etc etc, and this will at least help reduce upgrade problems from the
> 3.0.x packages on ftp.kde.org.
>
> Though in general I am *not* going to try to keep track of the mistakes
> made by everyone who puts up their own unofficial package repositories and
> then try to compensate for these mistakes in the official debs; this is
> just insanity.
>
> i.e., I am switching to epoch 4:, but I am *not* setting a precedent for
> everyone to do what they want in their own repositories and assume that
> the official maintainers will just deal with it. :)
Fair call. The epoch 4: mistake was started long before KDE got into Debian
so it's fair to deal with that. Other mistakes can just be left for the
users to deal with.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: