[Bug 168190] Review Request: gpsim - A simulator for Microchip (TM) PIC (TM) microcontrollers

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: gpsim - A simulator for Microchip (TM) PIC (TM) microcontrollers


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168190





------- Additional Comments From aportal at univ-montp2.fr  2005-10-05 04:53 EST -------
(In reply to comment #14) 
> (In reply to comment #13) 
> > To name these packages, I purpose gtk+extra for the 1.0.0 version and  
> > gtk2+extra for the 2.1.1 version.  
> OK with me. 
>    
> > What to do with the current package named gtk+extra-1.1.0 on the cvs?  
> > Because it will seems newer than gtk+extra-1.0.0.  
> I see 3 approaches: 
>  
> 1. package the official gtk+extra-1.x into gtk+extra and increment this 
> package's epoch. This way, the new gtk+extra package will drive the 
"inofficial 
> version" out of systems. 
 
I never use the Epoch tag. Should I have to put "Epoch: 1" in the spec? 
Should I have to do the same thing with the gpsim spec because 0.21.4 requires 
the inofficial gtk+extra package? gpsim version is now 0.21.11. 
Should I have to get a review request for the gtk2+extra package? 

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.