On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 10:02 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 16:49 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 08:55 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 15:39 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > >
> > > > > The guidelines also mention that use of %{?dist} is optional and not
> > > > > necessary in _any_ package.
> > > > One of the unclearnesses I don't find helpful.
> > > >
> > > > At the moment, we have various styles of release tags, which all are
> > > > incompatible and without any guarantee of a clear upgrade path ...
> > >
> > > In Core? Yes.
> >
> > Some random examples:
> > ..
> > ant-antlr-1.6.5-1jpp_9fc.i386.rpm
> > ..
> > dmraid-devel-1.0.0.rc11-FC6.i386.rpm
>
> Time to file bugs. ;)
>
> > > In Extras? No.
> > Yes. There exist packagers who (In FE devel)
> > * don't use %{?dist} at all
> > * some use N%{?dist} and increment N with each iteration.
>
> These are correct...
>
> > * some use N%{?dist}.M and increment M with each build-iteration
Example from FE6's package release mail having been sent a couple of
minutes ago:
poker-engine-1.0.15-3.fc6.1
> ...and these are not. More bugs to file!
Forgot to mention the case I consider to be the most broken version:
* N.M%{?dist}
with unclear meaning of M
E.g. these packages have just been released for FE6:
dejavu-fonts-2.7.0-0.15.fc6
xscreensaver-5.00-7.1.fc6
Q: Are N and M supposed to be <int>?
Ralf
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
