Zero epoch vs no epoch (patch)

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, seth vidal wrote:

>>  - Even if no epoch is specified, the metadata still specifies this as "0".
>>    For most code paths this is no problem as for all comparisons of version
>>    data, a missing epoch is the same as a "0" epoch. This should not be
>>    a huge problem and would be only a cleanup item for the repodata.
>
> what does removing 0-epoch items buy us?

What it buys is support for ancient rpm versions. Remember those 
monstrosities where non-existing epoch is not equal to zero epoch, epoch 
promotion and all that fun? I couldn't personally care less about the old 
rpm versions but there are people who do care, for example Dag and 
Matthias: 
http://lists.freshrpms.net/pipermail/freshrpms-list/2006-April/014022.html

Removing those zero epochs from repodata makes yum rather unhappy, dunno 
about smart, so changing the default is not really a possibility. But then 
neither supports the prehistoric versions that are of concern here. 
Attached quick hack of a patch adds a switch to turn off adding those 
artificial zero epochs, using this as necessary this should be enough to 
allow using repodata with full rpm 3.0.x - 4.4.x range.

Yeah, I just LUV digging up rotten zombies ;)

 	- Panu -