On 26 July 2011 13:22, Luc Menut <lme...@free.fr> wrote: > Le 26/07/2011 12:40, Michael Scherer a écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> while trying to work on the queue of update needing a push, I noticed >> that almost all of them use a "Release: 0". >> >> Since this has a specific meaning ( ie, used for pre release, or svn >> snapshot ), using this for updates is quite confusing, and I do not see >> the reason for that. > > When it is used for prerelease (mainly in cauldron), the release 0 is > usually associated with a svn or git rev. number, or date, or alpha, beta > ... so it is not so much confusing with this use in update for official > release. >
Exactly. (And I didn't see any users getting confused by that all those years in mdv). >> >> If the goal is to be sure that the software is still upgradable, the >> whole %mkrel stuff should take care of that. And if not, we can rebuild >> in cauldron to increase the release. > > We regularly used release 0 and subrel 1 in Mdv for the packages updated > with the same version in official releases and in cooker (firefox, > thunderbird, java-1.6.0-sun, ...), to be sure that the package from the > official release will be updated by a update to the devel release or the > next official release. > > we often used in such packages: > %if %mandriva_branch == Cooker > # Cooker > %define release %mkrel 1 > %else > # Old distros > %define subrel 1 > %define release %mkrel 0 > %endif > > regards, > Luc > Agreed. Besides, one can simply forget to bump the rel in Cauldron and the issue will lay dormant until the next distro release is out and upgrades fail, worse if the package is on the DVD and users get the infamous urpmi-casacading-failure. -- Ahmad Samir