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

RE: Re: xorg from 1.0.1-9 to 1.0.1-9.fc5



On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:39:20 -0400 Matthew Miller <mattdm mattdm org> wrote:
> There's no real standard for how updates like this are numbered/labeled;
> "-9.1.fc5" might have been more clear.
> In any case, "9.fc5" sorts as higher than "9", so RPM knows it's a new
> version.

I think you are under estimating hard job of package mantainers...
There is also a wiki on this, but I didn't find it useful to
understand this "fc5" appended to an already fc5 previous package...:
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines?action=show&redirect=PackageNamingGuidelines


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