[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should _p0 be allowed as a version suffix?

[Zac Medico]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

There are a couple of upstream packages that are release with p0
suffixes: ntp [1] and dvd95 [2].  Portage currently considers all
packages to have an implicit _p0 suffix, which means that
ntp-4.2.4_p0 < ntp-4.2.4-r1.  Should we ban the _p0 suffix from the
tree or should be change the version comparison behavior so that
implicit _p0 is less than explicit _p0?  We have a patch attached to
bug 171259 [3] which will make ntp-4.2.4-r1 < ntp-4.2.4_p0.

Zac

[1] http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=net-misc;name=ntp
[2] http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=app-cdr;name=dvd95
[3] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171259
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGPSkl/ejvha5XGaMRApR8AKCvFXSyDA6BuWOEshUM/zCAmfjn8QCeJ7d6
amNpRM7a8Qr93gbkkdGif9Q=
=8+lJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list