Bug 192590

Summary:	amaya 9.5 package in reality contains 8.8.5
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Axel Thimm <axel.thimm>
Component:	amaya	Assignee:	Aurelien Bompard <gauret>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5	CC:	appel, extras-qa
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2006-05-21 14:01:05 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Axel Thimm 2006-05-21 13:40:23 UTC

Description of problem:
The current amaya package is 8.8.5 labeled as 9.5. Both the installed files as
well as the About dialog show this.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
amaya-9.5-1.fc5

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.install amaya
2.rpm -ql amaya
3.amaya -> Help -> About
  
Actual results:
It's 8.8.5

Expected results:
Should be 9.5

Additional info:
The specfile in CVS looks OK (I didn't check the actual src.rpm), it uses

http://www.w3.org/Amaya/Distribution/amaya-fullsrc-9.5.tgz

So perhaps the bug is in upstream? The two version were releases simultaneously.

Comment 1 Aurelien Bompard 2006-05-21 14:01:05 UTC

You actually have both 8.8.5 and 9.5 in the same tarball, and they differ in the
graphic library : 8.8.5 is gtk, 9.5 is wxWidgets.
This package is orphaned, if you're interested in it, feel free to take it over.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 190605 ***

Comment 2 Axel Thimm 2006-05-21 14:11:58 UTC

Argh! Who on Earth comes up with such an insane versioning???
Alone due to this amaya should be dropped ... :/

I'll think about maintaining it. If I turn out to be using it (I'm looking for
an XML/MathML editor) I'll do so.

Thanks for the explanation. If it were April 1st, I would be sure you'd be
fooling me ;)