On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 07:41:31AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 23:16:52 (CEST), Felipe Sateler wrote:

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 17:08, Reinhard Tartler <siret...@tauware.de> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 17:44:03 (CEST), Felipe Sateler wrote:

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:14, Fabian Greffrath <fab...@greffrath.com> wrote:
Am 29.06.2010 13:39, schrieb Reinhard Tartler:

I don't have a strong opinion here, but I feel 4:0.6~ is good enough for
this. If you want to change it, go ahead.

I'll change it, just to make sure...

If the objective is to use at least the released version (and not a
svn snapshot), I think the correct approach would be to use 4:0.6.0~,
and not include the debian revision. This, however, would mean
changing the version from 4:0.6-1 to 4:0.6.0-1

this looks wrong to me.

what's the problem with 4:0.6~?

That you intended to restrict the dependencies to the first upstream
0.6 released package, but you actually loosened to any previous svn
checkout of the 0.6 branch.

oh, I see. Indeed. In that case, Fabian is right with 4:0.6-1~

This of course looses against 4:0.6-0ubuntu1, but that's hardly a
problem that we need to consider here anyway.

Correct.  That -0xyz1 Debian version string is the oldfashioned style.

Newstyle backport string would look like this: -1~xyz1 and work properly with the string proposed by Fabian.

If Ubuntu is still using the old style, you (or someone else reading this and using Ubuntu) might suggest them to change to the new one.

Kind regards,

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to