<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, James Antill <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:james@fedoraproject.org">james@fedoraproject.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 13:14 -0500, James Antill wrote:<br>
> On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 09:30 +0000, Tim Lauridsen wrote:<br>
> > + # Note we do not use the epoch to search as the epoch for the<br>
> > + # source rpm might be different from the binary rpm (see<br>
> > + # for example mod_ssl)<br>
> > + if newpkg.arch != 'src':<br>
> > + name = newpkg.returnSimple('sourcerpm').rsplit('-',2)[0]<br>
> > + src = self.pkgSack.searchNevra(name=name, arch = 'src',<br>
> > + ver = newpkg.version,<br>
> > + rel = newpkg.release<br>
> > + )<br>
><br>
> Epoch is not special ... the full e:v-r of the source package can be<br>
> different from the sub-package. We could extend base_package_name to<br>
> just be the first value of base_pkgtup?<br>
<br>
</div> Of course looking at doing this, I realize epoch is special because<br>
it's not in the sourcerpm name *sigh*. So putting it in core yum seems<br>
like a bad idea (pkgtupee = pkgtup except epoch ?;).<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Yum-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Yum-devel@lists.baseurl.org">Yum-devel@lists.baseurl.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>I just copied this part of thne code from yumdownloader to yum-builddep, so the comments followed with, so i have not made any bright thoughts about epoch in sprms :)<br><br>Tim<br>