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

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: [Bug 192912] Review Request: paps



On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 01:03 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:54:09 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > Forgot to mention the case I consider to be the most broken version:
> > * N.M%{?dist}
> > with unclear meaning of M
> > 
> > E.g. these packages have just been released for FE6:
> > dejavu-fonts-2.7.0-0.15.fc6
> 
> The old pre-release case, where the most-significant part of release is
> made 0 and hence makes it possible to ship a final 2.7.0-1.fc6 in the
> future without bumping Epoch.
IMO, an over-engineered miss-feature in the guidelines.

It prevents 3rd party packagers to supply packages. Otherwise, they
could resort to use: 
2.7.0-0%{?dist}.M

> > xscreensaver-5.00-7.1.fc6
> 
> This is bad. 7.1.fc6 is newer than 7.fc7. In general, '1' > 'f'.

> > Q: Are N and M supposed to be <int>?
> 
> Yes. _But_ it's only N{?dist} and 0.N{?dist} for pre-releases.
C.f. above. IMO, a defect of the guidelines and to be reconsider.

Let's keep things simple, instead.

>   "0." is a
> prefix, which creates a new field for RPM version comparison and doesn't
> turn N into a non-integer.

Ralf



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