On Monday 2015-08-10 02:38, Brent Cook wrote: >> On Aug 9, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> We have released LibreSSL 2.2.2, which will be arriving in the >>> LibreSSL directory of your local OpenBSD mirror soon. >> >> The .pc files in libressl-2.2.2 upset the package mechanisms at hand, in >> particular rpm, where ':' is used to denote the (ancient concept of) >> epochs. >> >> [ 99s] Invalid version (double separator ':'): 35:0:0: >> mingw32(pkg:libcrypto) = 35:0:0 >> [ 99s] mingw32(pkg:libssl) = 35:0:0 >> [ 99s] mingw32(pkg:libtls) = 6:0:0 >> [ 99s] mingw32(pkg:openssl) = 2.2.2 >> >> The version: field in .pc files is (still) supposed to be the >> package version number, not the ABI number, and this was not a problem >> in libressl <= 2.2.1. > >Thanks for the note, Jan. > >Right or wrong, I'm fairly certain the format has not changed any time >recently, e.g. here is the libtls .pc file from 2.2.1:
So it turns out rpm does not consider it an error, just a warning (but it is the first time the warning showed up on the last screenful, the one paid most attention to). >I'm not so sure that this should be the package version number though. Can you >point to some further documentation here? pkg-config(1): "Version: This should be the most-specific-possible package version string." * x:0:0 is not specific enough, as it would not change when the ABI-API stays unmodified between two releases. * the observation that all other .pc files I happen to have installed on my machine right now (some 194) all match \d+(\.\d+)*
