Re: new betas for GGV and GHex...
- From: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>
- To: gnome-hackers gnome org
- Subject: Re: new betas for GGV and GHex...
- Date: 03 Mar 2001 14:14:33 -0500
Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc cu-portland edu> writes:
> On 02 Mar 2001 10:28:22 -0500, jacob berkman wrote:
> > On 02 Mar 2001 14:25:13 +0100, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
> > > Jaka Mocnik <jaka gnu org> writes:
> > >
> > > > ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/stable/sources/ghex/ghex-1.2-beta2.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > ftp://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/stable/sources/ggv/ggv-1-0-beta2.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Argl... Next time, please drop the dash in front of the string "beta"
> > > ;) rpm doesn't like dashes in version numbers.
> >
> > well, if you are using the "beta" part in the version number you will be
> > screwed when the real one comes out, since 1.2beta2 has a higher version
> > # than 1.2.
> >
> > i'm sure you knew this though.
>
> Anybody running the betas should be competent to 'rpm -Uvh
> --oldpackage'. The hyphen in the string just makes it a bitch to
> package at all, rather than something that can easily be overcome. I
> personally think that it should have been 0.9 or something, but that's
> just me.
I think I mentioned this earlier on gnome-1.4-list: probably the best
course here is to abuse the release field a bit and make the package
name:
ghex-1.2-0.2
Regards,
Owen
_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]