Follow-up Comment #4, bug #15461 (project mc):
? First you commit Jindrich's patch that highlights obsolete tags
differently, and now you commit this patch removing these tags??
I think removing these tags from trpm makes sense: trpm is for browsing
installed rpms, so I do not expect many
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #15461 (project mc):
Sorry for the confusion: Browsing rpms of course has nothing to do with
(syntax) highlighting, so please ignore my last paragraph.
The fact remains that keeping these obsolete tags around to be able to browse
legacy rpms doesn't hurt.
(FYI I do
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #15461 (project mc):
Well, that was my concern initially but since noone cared to share his
opinion I figured that it doesn't really matter so much. If you feel that
those tags are indeed needed - please feel free to revert parts of the
patch.
Update of bug #15461 (project mc):
Status: Fixed = Postponed
___
Follow-up Comment #7:
Ok. I will (revert). (Introduction of EPOCH was indeed overdue.)
See also
Update of bug #15461 (project mc):
Status:None = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #15461 (project mc):
Category:None = VFS
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitemitem_id=15461
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #15461 (project mc):
What about rpms on older systems ?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitemitem_id=15461
___
Message sent
