On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 17:31 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 23:13 +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
>>> I have added a draft for handling Post Release packages.
>>>
>>>
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PostRelease
>>>
>>> Comments are always welcomed.
>>>
>>> ~spot
>> I would appreciate it if you would argue the case
>> in which upstream uses the tarball like
>>
>> <name>-<version>-<release>.tar.gz.
>>
>> One case is ImageMagick, and the other case is:
>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230560
> IMO, in such cases the upstream "version-release" should be treated as
> rpm's "version"
'-' is not a valid character in an rpm version.
man tr
%define tarvers 1.2.3-4.5.6
%define rpmvers %{expand:%(echo %tarver | tr - _)}
Version: %rpmvers
The real issue however is elsewhere:
What is the next "upstream version" of a package, after this
"version-release"?
Are we talking about snapshots?
E.g. gcc-4.1.2-20070123 -> final version: gcc-4.1.2
In this case, using "4.1.2-20070123" as rpmversion would be a mistake.
Or are we just talking about "upstream" using versioning which doesn't
fit into rpm's expectations, e.g.
xxx-1-20070123
xxx-1-20070210
...
In this case, what I said above would work.
Ralf