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

Re: FC1 tag in ethereal-0.9.16-2.FC1.1.i386.rpm

On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 08:23:36PM -0800, Nathan G. Grennan wrote:
>   I don't like the idea of adding the FC1 tag to future updates, and
> would love to see this update get replaced with an untagged version.

Tags are good for identification and enforcing upgrade paths for
concurrent builds (e.g. the second build of ethereal 0.9.16 for both
rh9, fc1, etc.).

But tags need to be standardized, and there was a looong and mostly
neglected thread (End. of Sep. - Beginning of Nov.) about disttags
but finally coming up with the fine solution of

     rh7.3 < rh8.0 < rh9 < rhfc1

currently employed by many 3rd party repos with concurrent builds
(drop the tag, if the package is really the same for all dists
including the dependencies).

>   Anyone have any information or comments on this?

Search the mentioned thread above ("retaining upgrade paths",
"disttags") and weep ...
Axel Thimm physik fu-berlin de

Attachment: pgp00161.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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