> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:ptxdist- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Olbrich > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 11:39 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ptxdist] ipkg-push failure for several packages > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 01:19:58PM +0000, Benoît BURNICHON wrote: > > There are undocumented restrictions on the package names and version > needed in order to have ipkg-push working. > > > > These are: > > Packages names should not contains any '_'. > > Packages versions should not contain any '-' or '_'. > > > > This is because the ipkg-push process need to add an ipkg version number. > It does this by assuming the ipk package name is as follows: > > > > ${PackageName}_${PackageVersion}-${PackageIpkVersion}_${arch}.ipk > > > > A simple sed is performed on this format and including a '-' in the package > version leads to incorrect parsing of package name. > > > > There are currently several packages having this issue: > > > > $ (cd ~/Pengutronix/ptxdist && grep -ne 'VERSION.*:=[ \t]*.*-.*' rules/*) > > rules/binutils.make:23:BINUTILS_VERSION := $(shell $(CROSS_LD) -v | sed - > e 's/.* \(.*\)$$/\1/g') > > rules/calibrator.make:19:CALIBRATOR_VERSION := 20070821-1 > > rules/canfestival.make:20:CANFESTIVAL_VERSION := 3-20081204-1 > > rules/chrony.make:20:CHRONY_VERSION := 1.24-pre1 > > rules/cross-insight.make:20:CROSS_INSIGHT_VERSION := 6.8-1 > > rules/dialog.make:19:DIALOG_VERSION := 1.1-20100428 > > rules/elektra.make:19:ELEKTRA_VERSION := 0.7.0-r1618 > > rules/fbtest.make:20:FBTEST_VERSION := 20041102-1 > > rules/fbutils.make:19:FBUTILS_VERSION := 20041102-1 > > rules/fbv.make:19:FBV_VERSION := 1.0b-ptx3 > > rules/gcclibs.make:22:GCCLIBS_VERSION := $(shell $(CROSS_CC) - > dumpversion) > > rules/hackbench.make:20:HACKBENCH_VERSION := 20070821-1 > > rules/host-localedef.make:20:HOST_LOCALEDEF_VERSION := eglibc- > 2.11.90-ptx1 > > rules/hping.make:19:HPING_VERSION := 3-20051105 > > rules/jed.make:20:JED_VERSION := 0.99-19 > > rules/libedit.make:19:LIBEDIT_VERSION := 20100424-3.0 > > rules/libezv24.make:20:LIBEZV24_VERSION := 0.1.1-ptx2 > > rules/lmbench.make:19:LMBENCH_VERSION := 3.0-a9 > > rules/ltt-control.make:20:LTT_CONTROL_VERSION := 0.87-09062010 > > rules/mbw.make:20:MBW_VERSION := 1.1-1 > > rules/media-ctl.make:19:MEDIA_CTL_VERSION := 2011.05.24-ga183835 > > rules/mysql.make:20:MYSQL_VERSION := 5.1.14-beta > > rules/ptrtd.make:27:PTRTD_VERSION_SUFFIX := -1~14 > > rules/rxtx.make:27:RXTX_VERSION := 2.1-7r2 > > rules/umkimage.make:19:UMKIMAGE_VERSION := 2010.03-1 > > > > To avoid conflicts, packages names and versions should follow the > > debian conventions > > Name: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Sour > > ce > > Versions: > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Vers > > ion > > > > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/first.en.html#namever > > > > Actually, there already is a solution for these issues. I have made the > needed changes for the above packages in several patches. > > I do not want to send them all to the mailing list. > > I don't think changing each package is the correct solution. For package > names we already replace '_' with '-'. Something similar should be done for > the version, when creating the ipks. > > Michael >
I did not change anything in the packages, I just give them a debian style version. Problems will occur when replacing chars with other chars as the version are trickier than package names: There is no way for a script to "guess" best version number. For example: 1.0.9-rc1 should be translated to 1.0.9~1 Ipkg is really touchy on packages versions (like debian is also) Ben ________________________________ Ce courriel et toutes les pièces jointes sont confidentiels et peuvent être couverts par un privilège ou une protection légale. Il est établi à l’attention exclusive de ses destinataires. Toute utilisation de ce courriel non conforme à sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse préalable. This email and any attachment are confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is intended only for the stated addressee(s) and access to it by any other person(s) is unauthorized. Any use, dissemination or disclosure not in accordance with its purpose, either in whole or in part, is prohibited without our prior formal approval. -- ptxdist mailing list [email protected]
