Re: letters in upstream version numbers
Noah L. Meyerhans writes: > In the case of the latest iputils package, it is ss010824. I assume 'ss' means 'snapshot'. You should use a version of the form 20010824, and ask upstream to change. If a 'normal' version number is anticipated soon, and you want to be able to switch without using an epoch, you can use something like 0.0.20010824 (this seems to be existing practice, anyway). P.S. your Mail-Followup-To: appears to be broken. Mutt came up with a message addressed to 'frodo' (in addition to -devel). -- things change. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: letters in upstream version numbers
On 26-Sep-2001 Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > Lintian gives errors when looking at a package with letters at the > beginning of the upstream version number. Ch. 4 of policy indicates > that the upstream version can't begin with a letter. However, it > doesn't really indicate what should be done in case an upstream version > does begin with letters. In the case of the latest iputils package, it > is ss010824. Should I just drop the letters from the version number, or > is there some other preferred way of making it comply with policy. > > It might be worth it to add some text to policy clarifying this issue. > A problem here is knowing what is the next version. Is it st010824? maybe ss010825? I think a common solution is to put '0.' or '1.' in front of the upstream.
Re: letters in upstream version numbers
Previously Noah L. Meyerhans wrote: > However, it doesn't really indicate what should be done in case an upstream > version does begin with letters. It shouldn't. Try prefixing it with a 0 or so. Wichert. -- _ / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
