Bug 227633 - RFE: Name conflict with web site: Should we have an obsoletes tag?
RFE: Name conflict with web site: Should we have an obsoletes tag?
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: eterm (Show other bugs)
6
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Terje Røsten
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-02-07 02:19 EST by John Guthrie
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-06-25 12:52:09 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description John Guthrie 2007-02-07 02:19:56 EST
Description of problem:
For several years, I have been grabbing the RPMs for eterm off of the website
http://www.eterm.org/.  I very recently discovered to my delight that FC6 now
had a package for it.  Now this is perhaps a *very* small nit, but the RPMs that
I have grabbed from eterm.org have always produced a rpm with the name Eterm,
not eterm as is currently in extras.  Should we have some sort of obsoletes tag
for all of the people like me who have been using the RPMs from eterm.org?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
0.9.4-4.fc6

How reproducible:
Every time.

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Install Eterm RPM from eterm.org
2.Run "yum install eterm"
3.
  
Actual results:
yum says that it will only install the eterm package, but not remove the Eterm
package.

Expected results:
It would be nice if yum were to upgrade Eterm to eterm.

Additional info:
Comment 1 Terje Røsten 2007-02-13 14:27:08 EST
I don't think I want to add obsoletes tag against other repos Eterm 
package. If Fedora had a package named Eterm before I would consider it.
Comment 2 John Guthrie 2007-02-14 11:07:18 EST
I don't think Fedora ever did.  (But Red Hat 6.2-7.2 did.  ;-)
Comment 3 Terje Røsten 2007-06-25 12:52:09 EDT
No more traffic here, closing as wont fix.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.