On Tuesday, 22 February 2005, at 16:25:07 (+0100), Toralf Lund wrote: > 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... Epoch is the wrong solution to a very real problem. Regardless of the situation, just saying NO! to epoch is the right move. And for the record, even a human couldn't tell that 2.0 is greater than 1337a.42c7 (partly because it's *not*), so anyone who actually used such a ridiculous version number deserves to be drug out into the street and trampled by mousketeers. Michael -- Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <mej@xxxxxxxxx> n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Sometimes I give myself the creeps. Sometimes my mind plays tricks on me. It all keeps adding up; I think I'm cracking up. Am I just paranoid? Am I just stoned?" -- Green Day, "Basket Case" _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
