[Patrick Lauer] > 1.0_pre20120503 maybe That'd be wrong if you expect a real _alpha, _beta or _pre of the given version in the future. I think in that case you'd need something like 1.0_alpha_alpha20120503 or 1.0_alpha_pre20120503.
There's something to be said for imposed structure, but in this case I'd have to side with the more general and flexible ~ syntax. And yeah, pretty happy to see rpm adopt it now too. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120503222900.gb2...@p12n.org
