On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 08:28 +0100, nodata wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 22.11.2007, 17:00 -0600 schrieb Callum Lerwick:
On Wed, 2007-11-21 at 10:49 +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
To put it shortly, I going to switch the default rpm queryformat to
include package architecture (ie what you get now with
rpm -q --qf "%{name}-%{version}-%{release}.%{arch}\n") in a few days or
so.
Not %{name}-%|epoch?{%{epoch}:}|%{version}-%{release}.%{arch} ? :)
That would encourage the use of epochs.
I don't think so -- "Look, this package has an epoch, I'll add that to
my package too"? Hardly. If I'm interested in the version of a package,
I'm interested in the epoch, too, if there's one. IMO, the only reason
against listing the epoch here is that RPM itself doesn't understand it
when specifying packages:
nils wombat:~> rpm -q gimp-2:2.4.1-1.fc8.x86_64
package gimp-2:2.4.1-1.fc8.x86_64 is not installed
nils wombat:~> rpm -q gimp-2.4.1-1.fc8.x86_64
gimp-2.4.1-1.fc8