Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 à 19:21 +0200, Samuel Verschelde a écrit : > Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 18:26:25, Anssi Hannula a écrit : > > On 26.07.2011 18:48, Samuel Verschelde wrote: > > > Le mardi 26 juillet 2011 12:40:02, 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. > > >> > > >> 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. > > > > > > The goal is indeed to make sure the software is still upgradable. Until > > > now, in Mandriva and we followed the same way in Mageia, the rule has > > > been : > > > > > > * if version is the same, just increase subrel > > > * if the update is a new version, put release 0 and subrel 1, then > > > increase subrel in subsequent updates concerning the same version > > > > > > If %mkrel could take care of that, that would be good, but for now this > > > is not the case, unless I'm mistaken : > > > > > > [sam@localhost mga]$ rpmdev-vercmp 1.6.17-1.1.mga1.i586 > > > 1.6.17-1.mga2.i586 1.6.17-1.1.mga1.i586 > 1.6.17-1.mga2.i586 > > > > I think misc meant using simply 1.6.17-1.mga1.i586. > > > > As soon as you have a second fix to do, it will become 1.6.17-1.1.mga1.i586 > so > my comparison is still relevant.
Well, as I said, how often does it occurs, and how often does it occurs to have a fix to the stable release that would not apply to the same software version that was not rebuilt on cauldron ? ( because, if it was rebuilt, it would have a increased release and/or version ). -- Michael Scherer
