Bugzilla will be upgraded to version 5.0 on a still to be determined date in the near future. The original upgrade date has been delayed.
Bug 51333 - rpmvercmp regression
rpmvercmp regression
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 50977
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: rpm (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jeff Johnson
David Lawrence
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2001-08-09 11:55 EDT by Peter Bowen
Modified: 2007-04-18 12:35 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2001-08-09 12:11:25 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Revert 21392 and add comments to better explain code (826 bytes, patch)
2001-08-09 12:11 EDT, Peter Bowen
no flags Details | Diff

  None (edit)
Description Peter Bowen 2001-08-09 11:55:19 EDT
This is a different bug that Bug #50977.  I am filing this seperately
because 50977 is an enhancement request, but this is a regression.

In RPM v4.0.2, which was included in RHL7.1, and released as an enhancement
for all supported versions of RHL (5.2,6.2,7.0), if RPM got confused when
comparing two versions it decided that the original RPM should stay.   In
Bug #21392, a fix was suggested, but this only made the problem worse.  Now
(RPM v4.0.3 CVS) the logic has been changed to if unsure, decide to replace
the RPM.

RPM should not change its behaviour mid-cycle.  I realize there were only
good intentions with this fix, but it is a definate regression.  It will
break the Mandrake, Connectiva, Kondara, madeinlinux, ASP, trustix, and
Scyld linux distributions if RPM v4.0.3 is released with the "fix" from
21392 applied.

I will attach a patch the reverts the change, and helps make the comments
in the code clearer as to why it was't correct.
Comment 1 Peter Bowen 2001-08-09 12:11:20 EDT
Created attachment 27073 [details]
Revert 21392 and add comments to better explain code
Comment 2 Jeff Johnson 2001-08-09 12:14:38 EDT
What's done is done, and any amount of fiddling, regressions, enhancements
need to be done collectively, not separately. So, to keep matters simple, since
whatever is gonna be done is gonna be done there, I'm going to collapse this
bug with #50977.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 50977 ***

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