On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 09:41:56 -0500, Fernando Nasser wrote:
Hi,
I'd also change the format to "the smallest possible integer". Epoch's
are already a pain as small integers like "1" or "2". Imagine as
"anything that is suited for the version/release tags is also suited here".
Also, I have mixed feeling about this. As there are some packages that
for historic reasons had to have their Epoch bumped, it is very easy to
forget to add the "1:" in front of the dependency versions. The other
thing is that RPMs deal with "EVR" where "E" stands for
"Epoch", so I
wonder if the right thing wouldn't be to make that clear by having the
Epoch, Version and Release tags all there, always (even if zero).
The packaging guidelines request already that wherever a versioned
dependency is used, the Epoch must be added.
Better would be to keep Epoch out of explicit versioned dependencies
completely and rely on Epoch-less "Provides". Example: Instead of doing
"BuildRequires: gtk+-devel >= 1:1.2.10" (notice the Epoch) one would do
"BuildRequires: gtk+(api) >= 1.2.10" and gtk+-devel would "Provides:
gtk+(abi) = %{version}" regardless of its"Epoch: 1" in the package.
The Epoch would continue to aid package resolvers.