On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 02:36:55 +0000, Keith G. Robertson-Turner wrote: > > Don't increase the Epoch without reason! > > > > Also, as a 3rd party package, your package should be release 0.fdr.1, so > > a package upgrade in Fedora Core would upgrade your one. > > Michael, I must admit that I really don't understand Epochs. > > This was my thinking: > > If this is a release based on a) new beta source and b) a new fedora > specific build, then I reasoned that the release should be x.fdr.1 with an > Epoch of 0. No, it ought to be release 0.fdr.x with the same Epoch as in the previous package. > I tried that, and rpm rejected the new package as an older release, Yes, because the Epoch comparison overrides the version-release comparison. 0.14.2.90 is greater than 0.14.2 0.14.2.90-1.fdr.1 is still greater than 0.14.2-2 but: 0:0.14.2.90-1.fdr.1 is considered lower than 1:0.14.2-2 > so I > surmised that the old Epoch (2) was superseding the release version. "Epoch: 1" would have been enough, because 0.14.2.90 > 0.14.2 > Are you saying that 0:0.14.2.90-0.fdr.1 is supposed to supersede > 1:0.14.2-2, No. > or should I simply have matched the Epoch with 1? Yes. > This is a completely unofficial build, but for those who are sticklers for > details, I will happily renumber the release/Epoch and rebuild. Unofficial or not, would you want anyone to run into problems? ;) Such as failed upgrades because RPM says pan-0.15-2 is older than pan-0.14.2.90-1.fdr.1? > Incidentally, what *are* valid reasons for bumping the Epoch? E.g. but not limited to, an upgrade path from package foo-1.0pre2-1 to foo-1.0-1, where RPM version comparison treats 1.0pre2 as greater than 1.0. [The fedora.us package versioning guidelines avoid that by moving the "pre2" into the release tag.] Or an upstream package split which causes an upgrade path from foo-2.0-3 and libfoo-2.0-3 to foo-2.1-1 and a new separated libfoo-0.5-1. Or binary incompatibility, where you want to make sure the user really has libfoo >= 2.0 compiled with the proper compiler version. You can check out the fedora-rpmvercmp tool if you want to experiment with RPM versioning. --
Attachment:
pgpbIbwbHjmux.pgp
Description: PGP signature
