On Fri, Aug 23, 2024, at 8:31 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder if it's allowed to use pkgrel for the upstream version? If so, > then there is no correct information related to the pkgrel available, > see > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon-bin > > My comment, including a correction ;) at the bottom: > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon#comment-987718 > > "Hi, > > please, don't misuse the package release for the unusual versioning > of upstream. > > If upstream's versioning is 1.2.3-1 then make the pkgver 1.2.3.1, if > it's 1.2.3-1.1 then make the pkgver 1.2.3.1.1. For example take a > look at how it is done for extra/linux-rt or extra/linux-rt-lts. > > Leave the pkgrel to the package release -1, -2, -3 and leave dotted > pkgrel to the users, so a user can build an individual -1.1, -1.2 > etc. and automatically follow the AUR, if the package maintainer > bumps the pkgver or pkgrel. > > Don't break the pkgrel, just because upstream does use such an odd > versioning. The pkgrel is for the package release, not for the > upstream version. > > Regards, Ralf > > Correction: Replace the "-" by a "_", see > https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD#pkgver " > > After taking a look at the Wiki I corrected my comment. IIUC then the > pkgver of extra/linux-rt or extra/linux-rt-lts isn't correct,too, but at > least a correct pkgrel is provided by those packages from extra, while > it's broken for the AUR's firedragons. > > Regards, > Ralf
The librewolf and librewolf-bin packages do this as well which is quite annoying. I have my own build system that imports from the aur and I have to bump the pkgrel from time to time for various reasons, and to work around the use of the pkgrel for the upstream version I've had to do a global replace for pkgrel to something else and then add my own pkgrel in.
