On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 12:09:12PM +1100, Craig Small wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 01:41:48AM +0100, Mattia Dongili wrote: > > actually it's me who did the Stupid Thing(TM). :) [...] > > the less ugly debian version name I found is *1.1.final-1*. Is it ok or > > has anybody a better suggestion? > > You have to decide if you are going to do this sort of thing all the > time or not. If it this is a once-off, I'd use an epoch. If packaging > rc versions is going to be a regular thing, then you need to decide how > to put your versions so the rc one appear older than the releases.
I'd like to continue to package also -rc versions, but since I'm also upstream of this package I could ask myself to use a more decent version numbering :) So I'd go for an epoch, but I'm still puzzled here: is 20040104:1.1-1 ok or should I go with 1.1.20040104-1 as I see that # if `dpkg --compare-versions 20040104:1.1-1 lt 1.2-1` ; then echo "1" ; fi # thanks again -- mattia :wq! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
