Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 08/13/05 15:04 CST: > Another question, what is the version name that is used. For stable > releases, instead of using naming it 2.2.26, they use stable-20050429. > IMO we should use their terminology. Two reasons: > (1) We are not at odds with the versioning scheme they use. > (2) No one will report the General Releases as version increments.
I am just about to commit changes. What I did was leave the version number in all places except the download URL. Though the tarball is named stable-20050429, it is still referenced by all the docs and everything else as 2.2.26. It even unpacks into a openldap-2.2.26 directory. Additionally, it is referenced as 2.2.26 on the download page as well as the 'stable' name. Here is where it is obvious that the stable version has incremented. Not sure if you saw my previous post about the --enable-dynamic parameter. Any thoughts? -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 15:08:00 up 133 days, 14:41, 3 users, load average: 1.07, 1.01, 0.84 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
