On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 06:20:54AM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak@xxxxxxxxx> > > The proper full name 'Red Hat Enterprise Linux X' is pretty long enough > already, there is really no need to make it longer by specifying full > versions (e.g 6.3 instead of just 6) in it. > > The full version string is available separately for interested apps. > --- > data/oses/rhel.xml.in | 80 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/data/oses/rhel.xml.in b/data/oses/rhel.xml.in > index 12d4a02..92ccbbc 100644 > --- a/data/oses/rhel.xml.in > +++ b/data/oses/rhel.xml.in > @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ > > <os id="http://redhat.com/rhel/2.1";> > <short-id>rhel2.1</short-id> > - <_name>Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2.1</_name> > + <_name>Red Hat Enterprise Linux 2</_name> This is absolutely not correct. There was never any '2', it was always called '2.1'. IMHO the current names are preferrable, since they are unique per <os> we record. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
