В Чтв, 06/05/2010 в 00:34 +0200, Stanislav Ochotnicky пишет: > Moreover if I am not mistaken database is not compatible between 4 and > 5 so if someone accidentally upgrades...he/she is screwed. That was > original reason for masking rpm-5 as far as I know.
It was hardmasked because some packages fail to build with rpm-5. And although currently patches exist I'm not sure if anybody tested/applied them yet. > Summary: > 2. What's your take on (re)moving app-arch/rpm-5? It could be SLOTed. But since nobody maintains it it's better to drop it from the tree with a clear message in ChangeLog why it was dropped. BTW, thanks for taking care of rpm. Currently I don't use it but I needed it some years ago and it was very pleasant to have it in the tree. -- Peter.
