[users] How should we report problematic packages?

Steve Huff shuff at vecna.org
Fri Jun 10 17:07:45 CEST 2011

On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Ben Tilly wrote:

> I don't even know what you mean by "declared with 'rfx'".

more information is in this post to the users list, from November 2010:


in a nutshell: Denis is pointing out that you're installing a rfx package (perl-DBI-1.616-1.el5.rfx), and it is clobbering part of an rf package (perl-DBD-File-0.34-1.2.el5.rf).  we expect rfx packages to clobber or conflict with upstream packages; however, we generally don't expect rfx packages to clobber other rf packages, so (as Dag points out) we should fix this problem.


If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
PGP 8477B706 (A92A 1F7E 6D76 16A0 BFF9  E61D AD54 0251 8477 B706)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 243 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20110610/8390affd/attachment.sig>

More information about the users mailing list