On 01/05/2013 02:12 PM, Chris Jones wrote:
Hi,
On 5 Jan 2013, at 09:53 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
It seems unfortunate to make the epoch user-visible at all, since a handful of
ports have large unsightly epochs. :/
That might be so, but i don't see an alternative. Macports might itself treat
the epoch and revision as different things to the package version, which of
course they are, but third parties cannot really be expected to understand such
nuances. In this case the pkg's created need a single version number I think,
so the version constructed for them have to include the epoch and revision
numbers, if the system is to properly support changes in them. I don't think
this situation is that different to rpm/deb packages on Linux systems, which
usually do something very similar, combining the native package version with
other versionings.
Using _ in the pkg version seems a good idea, as long as they are properly
understood, by systems like munki for instance ?
Munki uses the interval version number in the .pkg or .mpkg, it doesn't
care about the filename. Given that, I would still rather see
consistently named filenames.
Blair
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
