On 22/10/2023 16:42, Brian Inglis via Cygwin-apps wrote:
I should probably just skip the sequential "release" prefix to the date
suffix,
as 6.4-2023???? is presumably greater than 6.4-?.2023????, and we have
not yet implemented EPOCH:V-R dating yet, correct?
Yes, 2023???? (where ? stands for some digit) is bigger than any of the
numbers in the range 4...13.
Epochs are supported (theoretically), but I don't think you need to use
them here.
...and hopefully they ignore the sequential number.
Again, the question isn't about the meaning that a person ascribes to
the version number (because you can't reasonably expect people to
examine every package in detail), it's about the actions that setup will
automatically take.
Just to be clear about the process details and best practice:
I should create a dummy local dist tree for superseded versions,
with the tar file names prefixed with "-" and zero length,
You don't need to do this. This removes files (which I think you have
already done)
and P-V-R.hint files replaced with override.hint files,
each containing "replace-versions: V-R..." for old versions,
then sftp upload that dist tree in a similar manner to cygport upload?
Yes.
But if you are really going to upload a 6.4-2023MMDD sometime soon (or
anything greater than 6.4-13, in fact), you don't need to bother,
because that does supersede the removed test versions (and so any
installation of them will get upgraded).
