Re: [Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
So sprach »Digital Wokan« am 2001-07-24 um 18:57:54 -0400 : It does seem like a silly idea. If it's the third run at getting an RPM updated, it should be -3mdk, not -1.2mdk. Let's leave the dotted versions to the software and not the package attempts. Dotted versions are normally just security fixes. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 2 days 12 hours 50 minutes
Re: [Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
On Tue Jul 24, 2001 at 07:22:54PM -0700, Ben Reser wrote: It does seem like a silly idea. If it's the third run at getting an RPM updated, it should be -3mdk, not -1.2mdk. Let's leave the dotted versions to the software and not the package attempts. I actually believe they were being used to update packages after release, so that security updates on say 8.0 didn't end up having the same package version as packages in cooker. Apparently that was creating much confusing when there were two packages with identical versions but different contents. Exactly. This discussion has been made when we first started using decimal releases for security updates. The purpose of decimal releases for updates is so that the package is never higher than what is in cooker. Cooker should *always* have a higher revision number... For instance, if a new package comes out that fixes a security problem, it will be -1mdk in cooker. If I were to follow standard naming conventions, 8.0 would be -2mdk, 7.2 -3mdk, and 7.1 -4mdk... now all of a sudden it looks to rpm that the updates are newer than cooker. If someone wants to upgrade to something in cooker, they cannot do so easily because the revision for the update is higher (in the case of 7.1, as many as three revisions higher). decimal releases *work*. If they didn't, we wouldn't be using them and rpm would not be installing them. It is the logic in rpmdrake or rpminst that has problems and that needs to be corrected, not the update revision schema. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net 1024D/FE6F2AFD 88D8 0D23 8D4B 3407 5BD7 66F9 2043 D0E5 FE6F 2AFD - Danen Consulting Serviceswww.danen.net, www.freezer-burn.org - MandrakeSoft, Inc. Security www.linux-mandrake.com Current Linux kernel 2.4.3-20mdk-win4lin uptime: 4 days 23 hours 40 minutes. PGP signature
[Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
I don't recall the use of decimals being used in versions of rpms. ( I assume xinetd-2.0.3-1.1mdk is newer then xinetd-2.0.3-1mdk? rpminst seems to think 2.0.3-1 is the newer file? -jm _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
It does seem like a silly idea. If it's the third run at getting an RPM updated, it should be -3mdk, not -1.2mdk. Let's leave the dotted versions to the software and not the package attempts. Joe Menola wrote: I don't recall the use of decimals being used in versions of rpms. ( I assume xinetd-2.0.3-1.1mdk is newer then xinetd-2.0.3-1mdk? rpminst seems to think 2.0.3-1 is the newer file? -jm _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 06:57:54PM -0400, Digital Wokan wrote: It does seem like a silly idea. If it's the third run at getting an RPM updated, it should be -3mdk, not -1.2mdk. Let's leave the dotted versions to the software and not the package attempts. I actually believe they were being used to update packages after release, so that security updates on say 8.0 didn't end up having the same package version as packages in cooker. Apparently that was creating much confusing when there were two packages with identical versions but different contents. -- Ben Reser [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ben.reser.org Wizard's First Rule - People are stupid, they will believe anything if they want it to be true or they fear it is true - Terry Goodkind
Re: [Cooker] rpm naming format has changed?
Digital Wokan wrote: It does seem like a silly idea. If it's the third run at getting an RPM updated, it should be -3mdk, not -1.2mdk. Let's leave the dotted versions to the software and not the package attempts. No, the .'s have a specific purpose, they're used only for security updates to specific stable packages. So it helps one to distinguish between a Cooker update and a Security update and a normal package. -- Sincerely, David Walluck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
