[Yum-devel] Bug in parsePackages() ?

[seth vidal]

On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 21:16 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 14:05 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 21:04 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > > Just noticed something which to me looks like a bug: parsePackages() has
> > > a peculiar idea about naming conventions for packages with epochs:
> > > 
> > > [root at localhost yum-utils]# repoquery mozilla
> > > mozilla-37:1.7.8-2.x86_64
> > > [root at localhost yum-utils]# yum -d 0 list mozilla-37:1.7.8-2.x86_64
> > > [root at localhost yum-utils]# yum -d 0 list 37:mozilla-1.7.8-2.x86_64
> > > Installed Packages
> > > mozilla.x86_64                           37:1.7.8-2
> > > installed
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't parsePackages() be like this instead, or is there something
> > > within yum using this epoch:name-version-release.arch naming convention?
> > 
> > no.
> > 
> > epoch:name-ver-rel.arch is the 'accepted' specification so you can
> > string-based reverse-parse and get reasonably consistent results.
> 
> Hum, I don't recall *ever* seeing the e:n-v-r.a format used anywhere,
> whereas the n-e:v-r.a is very common where people bother showing epochs
> at all. 
> 
> Anything against it if I add the n-e:v-r.a mapping instead of replacing
> what's currently there?
> 

I don't mind it being added, no, but don't remove the e:n-v-r.a syntax.

-sv