Joe Landman wrote: > Now, we have an mpi version of the above. We do not want to package it > together with the original, but build it as a separate rpm. Not seeing any other replies, here are my thoughts. > Here is the question: When naming this, should we look at > application-mpi-1.0.1-1.i686.rpm > or > application-1.0.1-1mpi.i686.rpm > Is there a (defacto or otherwise) standard? Thanks! I don't think there is a standard. But some things do work better than others. Using a different release means that one package will always be "later" than the other package and will want to be upgraded if it is in the same depot. So that does not work very well. That leaves the other option. I think it is best is to use a different package name such as your application-mpi example. Then supply a Conflicts: with the application along with the proper Provides: and Obsoletes: so that one package cannot be installed with the other but instead replaces it. I am an APT user and the above seems natural for a package in that system. Bob _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
