| 1 |
Thanks. Before I posted I went back to the docs and checked the scheme |
| 2 |
but couldn't find anything to cover this weird case. I'll try the |
| 3 |
beta1102. If worst comes to worst I'll just do with the beta11 version |
| 4 |
until they release something that fits. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Thanks. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Brett I. Holcomb wrote: |
| 12 |
> Thanks. Before I posted I went back to the docs and checked the scheme |
| 13 |
> but couldn't find anything to cover this weird case. I'll try the |
| 14 |
> beta1102. If worst comes to worst I'll just do with the beta11 version |
| 15 |
> until they release something that fits. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Thanks. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
>> On Saturday 13 March 2004 14:02, Brett I. Holcomb wrote: |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>>> How do I specify a version of 0.9beta11.2 in the ebuild name? |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> For this sort of case, you have a few options, but the easiest is |
| 29 |
>> something like 0.9_beta1102. If upstream is really crazy with their |
| 30 |
>> version numbers and all of a sudden comes out with 0.9beta11.2.1, this |
| 31 |
>> breaks down though. beta11021 is bigger, but then what for beta12? |
| 32 |
>> |
| 33 |
>> Another option is to use the CVS like naming scheme. For example, |
| 34 |
>> 0.9_beta20040214. This is the safest, but probably most confusing for |
| 35 |
>> users. |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
>> If/Once http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37406 get's |
| 38 |
>> incorporated, you will be able to specify a version number of |
| 39 |
>> 0.9_beta11_p2. |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> Regards, |
| 42 |
>> Jason Stubbs |
| 43 |
>> |
| 44 |
>> -- |
| 45 |
>> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 46 |
>> |
| 47 |
>> |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives