> No comments from RH? Should every repository and its cat come up
> its own scheme creating more compatibility problems in the future?
Well, this thread is becoming old and boring and is like beating a
dead horse, so I am giving up ;)
Previously on this thread
> disttag can be:
> A B C
> Red Hat Linux 7.3 fdr0.7.3 rh7.3 rh7.3
> Red Hat Linux 8.0 fdr0.8.0 rh8.0 rh8.0
> Red Hat Linux 9 fdr0.9 rh9 rh9
> Fedora Core 1 fdr1 rh9.1 1fdr
> Fedora Core 2 test1 fdr1.95 rh9.1.95 1.95fdr
While I personally think that scheme A (e.g. using fedora like
disttags for past RH releases) would solve the problems best, it only
makes sense to me, if that would become a standard, and not only
something atrpms follows.
Since neither RH nor any other repo really commented on this
(constructively that is ;), I guess it means repos will go wild with
supporting multiple RH/FC releases. I for my part will use scheme B
(numbering FC with something higher than rh9, e.g. rh9.1, similar to
Rex Dieter's suggestion a while back).
I'm starting to use something similar in Planet CCRMA, I was previously
rh73 -> rh80 -> rh90
(so I can't really switch to rh7.3/rh8.0/rh9 at this point)
And now I'm rebuilding for FC1 with:
rh73 -> rh80 -> rh90 -> rhfc1
Seems to work fine.