[Fedora-packaging] Re: Guidelines and epochs

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Mon Jan 8 16:09:29 UTC 2007

On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 11:03:54AM -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote:
> >
> >Please remember what the true use of an epoch is, e.g. to override the
> >version for whatever reason. If something goes like 1.09, 1.10, then
> >you need the epoch because rpm sorts differently. And you would need
> >it for any virtual provides, too.
> >
> Axel, 1.10 wins over 1.09.  Why do you need an Epoch in this case?

Sorry, I meant 1.1 vs 1.09.

> Epochs should be just:  1, 2, 3, 4...  although I never saw it greather 
> than 1.

mozilla was at over 35, bind is at 30+, aspell-de/en is at 50, arpwatch,
dhclient, tcpdump 10+, and een kdebase/kdelibs at 6.

> >E.g. don't get fooled by that trick, it is more papering over than
> >dealing with epochs. And once you start introducing "second-tier"
> >epochs the confusion will be perfect.
> No need for second-tier epochs if people don't add anything than single 
> integer digits in there, anmd only use Epochs as a last resource case.
> The 1-9 range should last for the decade at least.

With second-tier I was referring to the virtual provides. E.g. you

Provides: foo-abi = 1.09

and then you will need

Provides: foo-abi = 1:1.1

That's what I means with second-tier epochs.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070108/4b856c1e/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list