On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Troy Dawson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Robert E. Blair wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I have a x86_64 install of 5.1 and on it I have installed a version of
>> openoffice from openoffice.org and don't have any pieces of openoffice
>> from the 5.1 distribution.  This morning it wanted to "update" my
>> openoffice 2.4.1 with the distribution 2.3 version.  I put an exclude in
>> sl-security.repo and sl.repo to tell it not to, but does anyone know why
>> it would want to do this?  The standard openoffice.org release is rpm
>> based so it should know better.
>> - --
>> Robert E. Blair, Room E277, Building 362
>
> The openoffice in Scientific Linux has an epoch of 1, which that from
> openoffice.org has an epoch of 0.
>
>  yum list openoffice\*
>
> That 1: at the beginning of our openoffice version is the epoch number.
>
> I don't know why redhat put a 1 on it, but they did.
>

Back port of edition I think. Basically they went to a newer version,
and it was broke so they had to push out an older version.. which
requires an EPOCH change. This would have been a while back but once
you walk down the path of EPOCH.. forever will it dominate your spec
file.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"