Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 227633 - RFE: Name conflict with web site: Should we have an obsoletes tag?
Summary: RFE: Name conflict with web site: Should we have an obsoletes tag?
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: eterm
Version: 6
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Terje Røsten
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2007-02-07 07:19 UTC by John Guthrie
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2007-06-25 16:52:09 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description John Guthrie 2007-02-07 07:19:56 UTC
Description of problem:
For several years, I have been grabbing the RPMs for eterm off of the website  I very recently discovered to my delight that FC6 now
had a package for it.  Now this is perhaps a *very* small nit, but the RPMs that
I have grabbed from have always produced a rpm with the name Eterm,
not eterm as is currently in extras.  Should we have some sort of obsoletes tag
for all of the people like me who have been using the RPMs from

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:
Every time.

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Install Eterm RPM from
2.Run "yum install eterm"
Actual results:
yum says that it will only install the eterm package, but not remove the Eterm

Expected results:
It would be nice if yum were to upgrade Eterm to eterm.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Terje Røsten 2007-02-13 19:27:08 UTC
I don't think I want to add obsoletes tag against other repos Eterm 
package. If Fedora had a package named Eterm before I would consider it.

Comment 2 John Guthrie 2007-02-14 16:07:18 UTC
I don't think Fedora ever did.  (But Red Hat 6.2-7.2 did.  ;-)

Comment 3 Terje Røsten 2007-06-25 16:52:09 UTC
No more traffic here, closing as wont fix.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.