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: Jim Cornette <fc-cornette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 17:45:45 -0400
In-reply-to: <46929479.108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4692584F.2080602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070709160114.GE12882@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6.2.1.2.2.20070709131242.04c7db90@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <46926DE8.3020907@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46926F98.4040505@xxxxxxxxxx> <46929096.6070704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46929479.108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: For users of Fedora <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070531 Fedora/1.1.2-1.fc7 SeaMonkey/1.1.2

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

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

It is the first time that I heard the reason. I'm not subscribed to thedevel list. (Either scorned when posting comment, mail ignored or justgot bored.)

Jim

Follow-Ups:
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Rahul Sundaram

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
- Re: fc7 should be f7
  - From: Rahul Sundaram

Prev by Date: Re: postfix failing
Next by Date: Re: libgcc and gcc deleted
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]