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

Re: Final solution: rhfc1 (was: Distags in rpm sort order (yes, versioning again ;))

Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 08 November 2003 01:33, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Many 1000 thanks to Fernando. This is the best solution. I forgot that
> rpm compares segment-wise and that longer stings are "newer".
> I suggest all repos to use Fernando' suggestion, rhfc1, if they are
> using rhXX for RHL. Please do use the same disttag for creating a
> uniform versioning, .e.g.
>         foo-1.2.3-4.rhfc1.at
> Replace ".at" with your own repotag, none, if you don't want one, or
> ".fr", ".dag", ".che", ".ccrma", ".rb", ".kde4rh" (just suggestions).
> Note: the repotag (contrary to the disttag) should not be part of the
> rpm ordering, which is why it should come last.
> Thank you Fernando, your brain was needed! This ******* thread was
> rotting for a month and a half, without anyone (incluing me) using
> their brains ...

Why toss more text into there?  Is it _really_ needed?  Is not "1.at" rpm 
newer than "0.9.at" and newer than "rhl9.at" ?  WHy are we continuing to 
put text where it really doesn't belong?   What's wrong with Warren's 
proposal that you feel it necessary to use something different?

- -- 
Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE	(http://geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team	(http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy)
Mondo DevTeam		(www.mondorescue.org)
GPG Public Key		(http://geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)

Was I helpful?  Let others know:
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)


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