[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Package Naming Guidlines



This is incorrect. If we have 1.0s < 1.0 then release V-R would have
been 1.0-0.X.s.%disttag for 1.0s and 1.0-X.%disttag for 1.0. with X > 1
in both cases. if we have 1.0s > 1.0 then we would have the same for 1.0
and 1.0-X+Y.s.%disttag for 1.0s. In any cases the "vepoch" (0.X/X/X+Y)
rules the release [before disttag].

	D

Le jeu 08/04/2004 Ã 18:10, Toshio a Ãcrit :
> Things could break with strange enough upstream alphabetic release tags:
> Betas of 1.0 taking the form 1.0[a-z] will break on upgrade from 1.0s =>
> final (foo-1.0-1.s.rh9 => foobar-1.0-1.rh9)  Don't knwo if that's enough
> of a reason, though.

-- 
         Dams NadÃ
Anvil/Anvilou on irc.freenode.net : #Linux-Fr, #Fedora
I am looking for a job : http://livna.org/~anvil/cv.php
"Dona Nobis Pacem E Dona Eis Requiem". Noir.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e=2E?=


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]