On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 11:04:35 +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > This does not take care of branch issues...
started to think and don't see this. File: abiword-2.2.11.tgz 8160 KB 01/11/05 14:41:00 File: abiword-2.2.9.tgz 8159 KB 04/09/05 19:19:00 Why are there two ? 2.2.9 is 'release', and 2.2.11 is 'stable', right ? Why, when you pkg_update, does 2.9 resp. 2.11 take care of branch issues, while 2.9-1234 respectively 2.7-2345 would not ? In the first case, it would be 2.2.9 used as flag for 'release', in the second case 1234. Why, if you move the id from version number to fingerprint, branches are not considered ? Another method: offer a local flat database pkg38rel.db containing all package names for 'release'; while pkg38st.db contain all packages for stable. Then, if a vendor version decrements, pkg_ff wouldn't even notice, but 'update' to the version identified in the local database. Uwe
