Alan Steinberg wrote:
I know for the standard version field only numerical values are
allowed. Otherwise, comparisons for minimum requirements on
dependencies and upgrades would not work. I am guessing that the
legacy version field is the same.
It isn't. The point of "legacy" is to populate the SVR4 package database
for the benefit of legacy tools like pkginfo and pkgparam. There was
never any formatting convention on the "VERSION" field of pkginfo for
SVR4, so for compatibility it follows there should be no such convention
for the legacy version value, otherwise it wouldn't be very 'legacy' :)
I am creating manifests properly now. I just had a syntax error. No
issue with legacy key values. The errant line should have been:
set add legacy version=1.1-02,REV=2009.09.17.18.12 pkg=... ...
and I have to specify all the legacy k/v pairs on the same line. Which
seems unnecessarily restrictive, but...
-Bob
-- Alan
Bob Doolittle wrote:
I guess it's not just underscores, I'm also getting this:
set legacy version 1.1-02,REV=2009.09.17.18.12
^
If this is just a simple bug, I can file/fix it, but if it's
something more fundamental I need to know.
Thanks,
Bob
Bob Doolittle wrote:
When I am using pkgsend, the following command:
pkgsend add set legacy version 1.1.osol_04
results in an error:
pkgsend: Malformed action at position: 28:
set legacy version 1.1.osol_04
^
Since this is setting a legacy value I would presume the range of
acceptable values should match SVR4, and an underscore is permitted
there.
Is this just a simple bug in pkgsend that can be fixed, or does it
reflect some deeper issue?
-Bob
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
