[pacman-dev] Misleading info when epoch is used

[Pierre Schmitz]

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:23:22 +0100, Xavier Chantry
<chantry.xavier at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
>>> Well, of course a new separator is not necessary, packager can do
>>> everything with '.', e.g. he can use "1.0.6.2a-2". It is just more
>>> readable to the user (and the packager). The key here is that epoch is
>>> no more than a simple version prefix, and I think it is needless to
>>> introduce %EPOCH% database field etc.
>>
>> Because this is ugly as hell and it will result in 100+ bug reports
>> and "why is the version number off" questions in the first year. KISS
>> applies both ways- keep the code simple, but keep developers lives
>> from becoming enveloped in the first level of hell, and this
>> suggestion would unfortunately do that. :/
>>

I don't know if this was already discussed or even implemented, but is
the epoch value taken into account when resolving dependencies? I am
asking because I couldn't update from openssl 1.0.0 to 1.0.0a using the
force switch as this broke all deps like >1.0.0.

Greetings,

Pierre

-- 
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre