| 1 |
On Saturday 08 May 2004 19:57, John David Ratliff wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yes. I missed the word integer before. It doesn't seem there is anyway |
| 3 |
> to specify this revision 1 except in -r1, which seems reserved for |
| 4 |
> Gentoo Linux specifics. I will just drop the r1 I suppose. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
What are the chances of getting r2 and actually needing it in portage (rather |
| 7 |
than beta9 or even release, that is)? If it is quite likely that r2 will be |
| 8 |
needed, then you might consider adding it as r81 or even r081, if more than |
| 9 |
r9 is likely to be created. Otherwise just dropping the r1 should be safe of |
| 10 |
course |
| 11 |
. |
| 12 |
Yea, its getting complicated :), but I've been bitten by a few packages with |
| 13 |
weird ideas on versioning and it is usually not very easy to "correct" your |
| 14 |
shortcut if you want to keep the right secuence of majority when some new |
| 15 |
unanticipated element in package version comes up... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
George |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives