On disttags
Rex Dieter
rdieter at math.unl.edu
Wed May 19 18:01:11 UTC 2004
Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> And you still have not addressed the issue of how to handle backported
> fixes.
IMHO, The only reason dist_tags can possibly cause any sort of problems
with backported fixes is dealing with rpm < 4.2 (or possibly rpm < 4.1
where is incorrectly sorts numerics vs. alphas in version/release tags).
In the scope of *this* discussion, we're dealing only with non-buggy
rpm versions, so Fedora Core can safely ignore those problems(*).
Futher, in the lack of existing dist_tags, these problems go away.
So, given foo-1-3 (for fc3) and foo-1-4 (for fc4), an fc3 errata can use
any of these safely:
If paranoid about upgrades to fc4, so foo-1-4 is *always* newer/greater:
foo-1-3.0.fc3 (my personal preference)
foo-1-3.fc3 (*just* adding dist_tag)
And by extension, a possible 2nd errata:
foo-1-3.1.fc3
Or to simpify things for the packager(s), and always use a single source
(and yes, possibly pushing out useless updates on some platforms):
foo-1-5.%{dist_tag}
-- Rex
(*) Or possibly someone (RedHat, fedora.us, or fedoralegacy.org) can
release an rpm errata to fix these issues as well.
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list