> Quoting Doug Ledford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: RFC OFED-1.3 installation > > On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 19:27 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Quoting Doug Ledford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Subject: Re: RFC OFED-1.3 installation > > > > > > On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 18:25 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > > Let me give an example. In OFED 1.0, you shipped dapl version 1.2. > > > > > In > > > > > OFED 1.1, you also shipped dapl version 1.2. However, code inspection > > > > > shows that between OFED 1.0 and OFED 1.1, dapl did in fact change > > > > > (not a > > > > > lot, but anything is enough). So, between OFED 1.0 and OFED 1.1, you > > > > > have two different versions of dapl, but with exactly the same version > > > > > number. A person can't tell them apart. > > > > > > > > Yes, this sure looks like a problem. I think that versioning needs to > > > > be addressed > > > > at the package level, not at OFED level though. Right? > > > > > > Versioning needs to be addressed at both levels. You need versions of > > > software to start with, but then you still need releases of packages to > > > differentiate between different builds of a specific version of > > > software. > > > > Why would we want to have different builds of a specific version of software > > for a specific OS? Could you give an example pls? > > It's how you integrate needed patches immediately while waiting on the > next release of the software.
OK. > ... > You also bump the release number of the package any time you make > changes to the spec file and rebuild. Since we have spec files as part of package, this will be really the same as the previous case, right? -- MST _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list ewg@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg