removed FC version of OOo FC put it back

Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Mon Apr 9 20:28:45 UTC 2007


linuxmaillists at charter.net wrote:
> On Monday 09 April 2007, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> linuxmaillists at charter.net wrote:
>>> I removed the FC version of OOo and installed the
>>> newest version from OOo. Later FC again installed the
>>> FC version of OOo why did that happen?
>> This is because Fedora OOo rpms have _EPOCH_.
>> Mamoru
> 
> What is EPOCH?  Also why would autoupdate downgrade an 
> installed package?

Well, current FC-6 newest OOo rpm seems 2.0.4 (I usually
use rawhide). Then Fedora rpms say:
------------------------------------------------
[tasaka1 at localhost i386]$ rpm -qp --qf '%{NAME} %{EPOCH}:%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n' 
openoffice.org-base-2.0.4-5.5.10.i386.rpm
openoffice.org-base 1:2.0.4-5.5.10
------------------------------------------------
here Fedora rpms have 'EPOCH: 1' ahead of normal version
and release number, which rpms provided from OOo say:
------------------------------------------------
[tasaka1 at localhost RPMS]$ rpm -qp --qf '%{NAME} %{EPOCH}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}\n' 
openoffice.org-base-2.2.0-9134.i586.rpm
openoffice.org-base (none)-2.2.0-9134
------------------------------------------------
here OOo rpms don't have EPOCH. In this case, rpm versioning
judges '1:2.0.4 > (none)-2.2.0' (i.e. higher epoch is judged as
"newer") and yum "upgrades" to "1:2.0.4".

Mamoru




More information about the fedora-list mailing list