Lamar Owen writes: > Yes, I am, actually. But it seems a broken way of dealing with it. > Although I do have another idea, thanks to Trond. Rather than package > '7.1RC4-1' I could package '7.1-0.1RC4' -- giving a straight > versioning. I could progress from '7.1-0.1beta1.1' through > '7.1-0.1beta6.2' through '7.1-0.2RC1.1' to '7.1-1'. Just name them 7.1betax 7.1rcx 7.1.0 7.1.1 etc. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://yi.org/peter-e/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a ... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going fro... Oliver Elphick
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going... The Hermit Hacker
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats ... Lamar Owen
- [HACKERS] Re: RPM upgrade caveats going from a ... Alessio Bragadini
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a beta... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a beta vers... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a beta... Lamar Owen
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a ... Oliver Elphick
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a ... Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a beta vers... Len Morgan
- Re: [HACKERS] RPM upgrade caveats going from a beta... Oliver Elphick