> > Only a short response, as I'm a bit in a hurry right now. From > > #gentoo-council earlier: > > > > 18:25 <@robbat2> make him covert it to "_rc%04d%04d%02d%02d",$RC,$YEAR, > > $MONTH,$DAY > > Let me see if I have this straight: suppose we have package foo-0.1_rc2 > released (very outdated) and we're waiting for foo-0.1_rc3. Then example > of something between those two would be foo-0.1_rc000220070313? Would > that force portage to update to this version? Wouldn't that prevent > portage from enforcing update to _rc3 when it's delivered? Of course I > might be wrong and if this is the case then excuse me for the whole fuss ;)
I was planning to post the same question and then I reread danny's and robin's mails : what rc3 will actually be named is something like : _rc000300000000 not a very funky name but like that portage will see it as > rc000220070313, otherwise rc3 is < rc000220070313 that also means doing some funky $P renamings in the ebuild to catch upstream _rc3 tarball, but that's probably better than allowing such multiple suffixes. [And that'll make us differ from upstream naming scheme for the whole _rc series] Regards, Alexis.
pgpwhSsezguRz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
