On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:59:45 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 21.01.2008 16:30, Joel Andres Granados wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:03:06 +0100, Joel Andres Granados wrote:
Michael Schwendt wrote: Don't know what to make of it. So I assume from "You cannot downgrade a package without asking the epel-signers to delete a newer package", that the solution is to delete the newer package. right?
Mail the repo admins in accordance with the EPEL FAQ in the Wiki and request removal of the 1.1.6 package. (it is enough to delete the src.rpm and let repoprune kill the various binaries)
ok. sent mail to EPEL signers group. :)
Hmmm. Is it wise to remove it? If I understood the discussion correctly then users that already have the currently newest version of python-imaging in EPEL4 installed will never get a update should there ever be released one with a EVRN lower then (none):1.1.6-3.el4.
But is the newer package in EPEL4 maintained actively? In CVS it is back at 1.1.4 already. Will any bug-fix/security-fix released for RHEL4 be ported to the >1.1.6 pkg in EPEL4? If that doesn't happen, keeping the 1.1.6 brown paper-bag in the repo makes no sense.
On the other hand: we cannot increase the epoch only in EPEL4 because then the upgrade path to RHEL5 is broken (still/again).
Which of the two things is worse?
The third thing. ;) Replacing a pkg from RHEL ;-P and an attitude like "damage is done, we can't revert it". Next time it happens with a different package, you won't revert it either?