Thanks ... I will try that when I get a chance. I'm assuming then that sorting is 'ls' style ?
Anyone else on this list have comments regarding the other issue of upgrading 1.1 -> 1.2 across a large no. of machines and whether it makes sense to root openpkg under a version'd directory name ( /foo/opkg/1.1, /foo/opkg/1.2, etc. or /foo/opkg/1.x for all versions 1.x) ? Thanks, -- Vinod On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Andrews, Martin wrote: > Vinod, > > Then probably just append the .orgname.number to the existing release > number. This will make the resulting rpm seem newer than the release you > based it on but less then the next release. Though I am guessing you don't > want to automatically upgrade to the next release from the original > organization as it may well not include changes you have made (and > presumable want). > > Martin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vinod Kutty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 1:48 PM > > To: OpenPKG Users > > Subject: RE: Naming conventions > > > > > > > > Martin, > > > > Thanks for the quick reply 8-) > > > > How does that affect upgrades, i.e. between versions, does rpm and/or > > openpkg-tool recognize the concept of "newer" if the > > version/release is > > not a number? (Sorry ... that's something I haven't read up > > on ... it's > > probably in the RPM HOWTO) > > > > I was hoping for some scheme that retains the default openpkg > > release plus > > some identifier, making it easier to discern from 'rpm -qa' > > what packages > > were customized, and what the corresponding default > > release/version was > > that each one was derived from. > > > > -- > > Vinod > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org > User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org User Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
