future kernel module rpm situation (was: kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert))

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 10:07:25AM -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > > Now, with this out of the way, forgive me for digging a little deeper: the
> > > > change is due to a limitation on rpm, right? Couldn't we just fix rpm?
> > > 
> > > yum/apt/up2date. All three of them.
> > 
> > Not apt, I have quite often switched arch with apt.
> 
> As have I - remember all the nptl problems people saw in rhl9-era? A
> fair number of those were apt switching from glibc.i686 to glibc.i386
> midstream.

which was a bug in the repo (the updates repo) not providing the same
NEVR, but uploading i386 first.

How will yum handle athlon downgrades to i686 or i386? Yes, there are
no such packages in download.fedora.redhat.com (other than FC1
kernels), but such packages exist, and should the package maintainers
also have to rename their packages for changing the arch?

> iirc, panu included an option into apt to protect from that happening.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040615/8fcfbf80/attachment.sig>