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

Re: Inconsistent package tags



Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 12:04 +0930, n0dalus wrote:
On 24 Jun 2007 20:31:22 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs math uh edu> wrote:
n> 369 (216) packages with fc8 in the release tag (shouldn't we be
n> using f8?)

No, it's fc8.  f8 would sort less than fc7, causing badness.
I know, but its still undesirable to need to put 'fc' in every package
of every release from this point on. Could packages be moved over to
f8 by using release numbers, epochs or some other rpm hack?

No.

Couldn't we tag all packages built *from this point on* with f8? New builds have to bump the EVR anyway, so 2.f8 is still greater than 1.fc7. The whole "f8 is rpm-less than fc7" argument is only valid if you assume no other changes to a package's EVR when being rebuilt, but AFAIK there's never been a package rebuilt in fedoraland where the disttag was the only thing that was bumped. Granted, that means there would be a mix of 'fc' and 'f' packages, but that's no more tacky than our current fc6+fc7 mix.

-Brandon


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