tlug: updates

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>]

>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Stone <sstone@example.com> writes:

    Scott> Just a hint - you may want to check the 'do downgrades'
    Scott> checkbox in the Options screen when doing updates - some
    Scott> versioning schemes don't quite make it obvious that a
    Scott> version is newer than another one... comparing them isn't
    Scott> as easy as you might think, so I'll need to update the
    Scott> comparison algorithm later to have more intelligence.  It
    Scott> should handle 95% of the possible cases correctly, but
    Scott> every once in a while you'll get a weird one.

debian/rules

:-)

Use an "epoch" in your version strings.  Choose a separator character
(Debian uses `:') not allowed in package names or version strings.  If 
this character is missing, the epoch defaults to 0.  Otherwise, it
must be numerical, and in faux-BNF,

package_string := package_name n-separator
                  epoch e-separator
                  upstream-version v-separator
                  TL-revision
                  other-stuff-eg-architecture
                  ".rpm"

This allows you to handle upstream packages that do sequencing like
1.1, 1.2, 1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2, ... (ie, what we normally think of as
the minor version actually indicated some sort of pre-release).  So we 
have 0:1.1, 0:1.2, 1:1, 1:2.1, 1:2.2, 1:2.3, 2:2, ....  Ugly as sin,
but it works....

'Course, rpm will probably barf.  You may need to choose the character 
so that rpm thinks it's part of the package name.  Arggh.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Next TLUG Meeting: 13 June Sat, Tokyo Station Yaesu gate 12:30
Featuring Stone and Turnbull on .rpm and .deb packages
Next Nomikai: 17 July, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
After June 13, the next meeting is 8 August at Tokyo Station
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp