Re: fc7 should be f7

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: fc7 should be f7
From: Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:33:05 +0530
In-reply-to: <46929096.6070704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Red Hat
References: <4692584F.2080602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070709160114.GE12882@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6.2.1.2.2.20070709131242.04c7db90@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <46926DE8.3020907@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46926F98.4040505@xxxxxxxxxx> <46929096.6070704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: For users of Fedora <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070615)

Martin Marques wrote:

Benjamin Lewis escribió:

As has been mentioned before, f7 sorts incorrectly with fc6, so updates
would fail to work properly.
i.e. f7 sorts before fc6, when it should sort after.


Why?

2.1-1.fc6 comes before 2.1-2.f7.


All this has been discussed in length in fedora-devel list.

Rahul

Follow-Ups:
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Jim Cornette

References:
- fc7 should be f7
  - From: Martin Marques
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Todd Zullinger
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Eric
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Rahul Sundaram
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Benjamin Lewis
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Martin Marques

Prev by Date: Re: fc7 should be f7
Next by Date: Re: F7 dhcpd upgrade bug? dhcpd did not restart on upgrade.
Previous by thread: Re: fc7 should be f7
Next by thread: Re: fc7 should be f7
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Current Fedora Users] [Fedora Desktop] [Fedora SELinux] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [KDE Users] [Fedora Tools] [Fedora Docs]