Daniel Devine writes:
The current situation in a nutshell: * courier-0.75.0.tar.bz2 (let's call it "Tarball A") has the version 0.75.0 and produces RPM packages with the version number 0.75.0 - the imapd package is called "courier-imap" * courier-imap-4.16.2.tar.bz2 ("Tarball B") has the version 4.16.2 and produces an RPM packages with the version number 4.16.2 - the imapd package is called "courier-imapd" * The code for imapd in Tarball A and Tarball B are pulled from the same repository at the same revision (as in, Tarball A code is a subset of the Tarball B code) * Tarball A/"courier-imap" RPM puts the imapd executable at /usr/lib/courier-imap/bin/imapd * Tarball B/"courier-imapd" RPM puts the imapd executable at /usr/lib/courier-imapd/bin/imapdBasically this means that when creating an RPM package which depends on courier IMAP you cannot define the dependency via package name because there is two package names for the same dependency and if you require a particular courier IMAP version you cannot express it because there is two different version numbering systems (0.7x.x and 4.xx.x) and you cannot (properly - technically you can) use paths to express solutions for dependencies because imapd is placed in two different locations (.../courier-imap/... and .../courier-imapd/...). Is this problem known?
A given Linux distribution is going to either package Courier, or Courier- IMAP. It makes little sense to package both. As such, a given Linux distribution will need to track the version of only one or the other package.
pgpNuRIuvSArK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
