This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Package naming dilemma
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 20:47:04 +0100
- Subject: Package naming dilemma
Heya all,
I want to ITP remake (the make debugger) and I can't figure out how to name
it.
The upstream source is called remake-3.80+dbg-0.61.tar.gz. If I plug this
into g-b-s unaltered, it decides the parts of the package name are:
DKAdmin@ubik /usr/build/package/remake> ./remake-3.80+dbg-0.61-1.sh
PKG remake-3.80+dbg VER 0.61 REL 1
BASEPKG remake-3.80+dbg-0.61
SHORTPKG remake-3.80+dbg-0.61
FULLPKG remake-3.80+dbg-0.61-1
The problem with this approach is that if I wanted to patch it up to
make-3.81 at some point, it would look like a different package, instead of a
newer version of the same one. It's an unusual situation; effectively
upstream are referring to it as a combination of two packages, each with a
full release number. I could bodge all the release numbers together like
this:
DKAdmin@ubik /usr/build/package/remake> ./remake+dbg-3.80.0.61-1.sh
PKG remake+dbg VER 3.80.0.61 REL 1
BASEPKG remake+dbg-3.80.0.61
SHORTPKG remake+dbg-3.80.0.61
FULLPKG remake+dbg-3.80.0.61-1
- is it OK to have a VER with four parts? Anyone got a better idea?
Incidentally, it's also part of my plan to maintain it with the old cygwin
make DOS path-handling patches, which I hope will satisfy a lot of the current
complaints on the main list. :D
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....