Am Dienstag, den 03.01.2006, 10:24 -0500 schrieb Dave Jones:
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 03:16:31PM +0000, Andy Burns wrote:
>
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/kernel/linux-2.6.15.tar.bz2.si...
> >* Tue Jan 3 2006 Dave Jones <davej(a)redhat.com>
> >- Update to 2.6.15 final.
> Nice milestone :-)
> Just wondering about version numbering in Fedora, how come the rawhide
> kernel has been named 2.6.14-1.x when it has clearly been tracking
> 2.6.15-rcx-gitx
iirc it confuses rpm when faced with decisions like
"which is newer, 2.6.14.1 or 2.6.14-git1"
Thats true. In Fedora Extras for example something like this would have
to be used:
Version: 2.6.15
Release: 0.rc1.git1
to circumvent problems until
Version: 2.6.15
Release: 1
is released.
So we make its life simple, and stick with a
2.6.x-CVSident_$releasever
I disagree. IMHO is confuses users, journalists (they wrote "FC4 is
based on a 2.6.11 kernel" -- but in fact it was 2.6.12rc5) and
packagers, that sometimes have to add patches like this
-#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,15)
+#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,14)
to their packages. Such patches also need to be applied on a case by
case basis in the spec file in case the package is build for a real
2.6.14.
/me was bitten by a problem similar to this example just some days ago
CU
thl
--
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info>