1 |
В Чтв, 06/05/2010 в 00:34 +0200, Stanislav Ochotnicky пишет: |
2 |
> Moreover if I am not mistaken database is not compatible between 4 and |
3 |
> 5 so if someone accidentally upgrades...he/she is screwed. That was |
4 |
> original reason for masking rpm-5 as far as I know. |
5 |
|
6 |
It was hardmasked because some packages fail to build with rpm-5. And |
7 |
although currently patches exist I'm not sure if anybody tested/applied |
8 |
them yet. |
9 |
|
10 |
> Summary: |
11 |
> 2. What's your take on (re)moving app-arch/rpm-5? |
12 |
|
13 |
It could be SLOTed. But since nobody maintains it it's better to drop it |
14 |
from the tree with a clear message in ChangeLog why it was dropped. |
15 |
|
16 |
BTW, thanks for taking care of rpm. Currently I don't use it but I |
17 |
needed it some years ago and it was very pleasant to have it in the |
18 |
tree. |
19 |
|
20 |
-- |
21 |
Peter. |