The repo [haskell-testing] now contains all packages from
[haskell-core] modified according to one of the alternatives for a new
versioning scheme:
-_-
All the existing packages have been taken apart, had their meta data
modified, and then been re-assembled again.
If you feel brave, please t
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 07:07:48PM +0900, Nicola Squartini wrote:
> Release numbers would still be reset on adding:
>
> xrev == 0 -->
> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
> add xrev == n && n > 0--> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-1.n-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
> add , xrev == 0 -
Release numbers would still be reset on adding:
xrev == 0 -->
haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
add xrev == n && n > 0--> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-1.n-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
add , xrev == 0 -->haskell-zlib--1-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
The only concern that I have with your ve
On 30 April 2015 at 10:21, Nicola Squartini wrote:
> Sorry, keep replying to one person only instead of the mailing list.
>
> How about the other way around:
>
> if xrev == 0 --> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
> if xrev == n && n > 0 --> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76.n-x86_6
On 30/04/15 06:55, Fabien Dubosson wrote:
> The `pkgrel' must be an integer incremented by 1, but there are no
> defined format for `pkgver'. So why not using `pkgver_xrev-pkgrel' in
> which `pkgver_xrev' is the `pkgver' defined in the PKGBUILD? It is
> allowed to do so, will be strictly incrementi
Sorry, keep replying to one person only instead of the mailing list.
How about the other way around:
if xrev == 0 --> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
if xrev == n && n > 0 --> haskell-zlib-0.5.4.2-76.n-x86_64.pkg.tar.xz
Nicola
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Xyne
