Hi.
Are any of the "Maximum RPM" maintainers around? (Or are there any these days?)
I just felt like commenting on its explanation on the usage of "Epoch", which may e.g. be found here:
http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/s1-rpm-depend-manual-dependencies.html#S4-RPM-DEPEND-VERSION-EPOCH
In particular, I think the following paragraph misses the point somewhat:
Solution Number 2: Just Say No!
If you have the option between changing the software's version-numbering scheme, or using epoch numbers in RPM, please consider changing the version-numbering scheme. Chances are, if RPM can't figure it out, most of the people using your software can't, either. But in case you aren't the author of the software you're packaging, and its version numbering scheme is giving RPM fits, the *epoch* tag can help you out.
I mean, I guess it depends on when you decide to "Say No!", but the way I've always looked at it, epoch was pretty much designed precisely for the event when you do say no (to weird versioning logic.) For instance, what happens after you decide that although the last version your little software package is 1337a.42c7, you won't use the number normally following that (whatever that might be) for the one you're releasing just now, but rather call it 2.0 like normal people would? Obviously, rpm won't understand that 2.0 is actually newer than 1337a.42c7, just like that. I would suggest that what you do in this case, is to "Say No!" *and* use epoch...
I just thought I might mention it...
- T
_______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
