-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Saturday 08 November 2003 01:33, Axel Thimm wrote:
Many 1000 thanks to Fernando. This is the best solution. I forgot
rpm compares segment-wise and that longer stings are "newer".
I suggest all repos to use Fernando' suggestion, rhfc1, if they are
using rhXX for RHL. Please do use the same disttag for creating a
uniform versioning, .e.g.
Replace ".at" with your own repotag, none, if you don't want one, or
".fr", ".dag", ".che", ".ccrma", ".rb",
".kde4rh" (just suggestions).
Note: the repotag (contrary to the disttag) should not be part of the
rpm ordering, which is why it should come last.
Thank you Fernando, your brain was needed! This ******* thread was
rotting for a month and a half, without anyone (incluing me) using
their brains ...
Why toss more text into there? Is it _really_ needed? Is not "1.at" rpm
newer than "0.9.at" and newer than "rhl9.at" ? WHy are we continuing
put text where it really doesn't belong? What's wrong with Warren's
proposal that you feel it necessary to use something different?
Jesse Keating RHCE MCSE (http://geek.j2solutions.net
Fedora Legacy Team (http://www.fedora.us/wiki/FedoraLegacy
Mondo DevTeam (www.mondorescue.org
GPG Public Key (http://geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub
Was I helpful? Let others know:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----