Jack Howarth wrote: > Alexander, > When one has two packages, > > foobar.info > foobar-10.4.info > > where foobar.info has... > > Version: 1.0 > Revision: 1.0 > Distribution: 10.5, 10.6 > > and foobar-10.4.info has... > > Version: 1.0 > Revision: 1.0 > Distribution: 10.4 > > I thought the foobar-10.4.info is ignored by fink > unless the Revision is higher than the stock package > for foobar.info. This can be seen by comparing the > Revisions in gauche-10.4.info, gauche-10.5.info and > gauche-10.6.info in the languages subdirectory. Their > revisions (for the same version) are 1, 1001 and 2001 > specifically. In the case of a variant that has a > version *lower* than the main package file a revision > is insufficient and an epoch must be used. > Jack > ps I wouldn't add the epoch to unzip-10.4.info though > since I'm sure my proposed changes to unzip-10.4.info > I will build (after bumping the revision to 100). > > You don't want to have a higher revision in 10.4 than 10.5 or 10.6.
I'll offer the counterexample of octoplot, which has the same revision for 10.4 and 10.5, but uses a separate .info because different patches are needed. My understanding is that higher OS versions of a package get higher revisions if they need to be rebuilt when updating to a different OS version. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [email protected] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel Subscription management: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
