Warren's Package Naming Proposal - Revision 2
Pozsar Balazs
pozsy at uhulinux.hu
Sun Nov 9 18:29:27 UTC 2003
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:20:28AM -1000, Warren Togami wrote:
> C-3. Non-Numeric Version to Release
> -----------------------------------
> As mentioned above in section B (Version) and C-2 (Vepoch), non-numeric
> versioned packages can be problematic so they must be treated with care.
> These are cases where the upstream version has letters rather than
> simple numbers in their version. Often they have tags like alpha, beta,
> rc, or letters like a and b denoting that it is a version before or
> after the number. Read section B to understand why we cannot simply put
> these letters into the version tag.
>
> Release Tag for Pre-Release Packages:
> 0.%{X}.%{alphatag}
> Release Tag for Non-Numeric Post-Release Packages:
> %{X}.%{alphatag}
> Where %{X} is the vepoch increment, and %{alphatag} is the string that
> came from the version.
[...]
PLEASE, take a look at dpkg's and apt-get's way of handling pre-release
versions, I really do think that should be used in rpm-based distros
too.
The idea is to introduce a character, namely '~' (tilde), which is
sorted specially: in comparison it comes before anything else.
This way, you can get ordering like this:
1.0~alpha1 < 1.0~alpha2 < 1.0~beta < 1.0 < 1.0a < 1.0b
1.0~pre1 < 1.0~rc1 < 1.0 < 1.0.1 < 1.0.2
... and so on.
Hope you got the point.
I know it should be implemented in rpm, and this is not a trivial move,
but please do think about it. It will make all these
pre-release-versioning nightmares go away.
bye,
--
pozsy
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list