[hipl-dev] Re: binary package naming convention
- From: Diego Biurrun <diego@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hipl-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:24:35 +0200
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 02:48:54PM +0300, Miika Komu wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 02:02 PM, Miika Komu wrote:
>>
>> I've got still some emails to catch up, but why was the package
>> numbering changed?
>>
>> mkomu@bling:~/projects/hipl-bzr/trunk$ ls ../*deb
>> ../hipl-all_1.0.6-2_all.deb ../hipl-daemon_1.0.6-2_amd64.deb
>> ../hipl-dnsproxy_1.0.6-2_amd64.deb ../hipl-doc_1.0.6-2_all.deb
>> ../hipl-firewall_1.0.6-2_amd64.deb
>>
>> It used to be hipl-<package>_1.0.6-<trunk_revision>.deb but now
>> trunk_revision has been replaced with 2.
>
> it appears that this has been messed up only in Ubuntu/Debian, so
> there's now an asymmetry with Fedora.
That was easier to fix than I thought initially - enjoy.
Diego
Other related posts:
