Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
rpm-list · Redhat RPM List
  • Members Only
  • Post
  • Files
  • Photos
  • Links
  • Database
  • Polls
  • Calendar
  • Promote
  • Groups Labs (Beta)
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

   Messages Help
Message #
Search:
Advanced
Building RPMs - Philosophy 101 Question   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #12958 of 26827 |
Re: Building RPMs - Philosophy 101 Question

> Does anyone know what standards might exist on generating Version and Release
> numbers for RPM spec files.
>
> ie. Version 1.2.3 Release 4
>
> 1 = major version - changes occurred that effect interfaces
> 2 = minor version - changes occurred but interfaces are the same
> 3 = possibly bug fix or configuration related updates.
> 4 = release candidate 4

Version is for the version number of the packaged app, which you describe
above. Release is for the the release number of the RPM itself, and should
start with zero for each version and count up if necessary.

So,

Version: 1.2.3rc4
Release: 1


--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@...
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
Boston University Linux ---> http://linux.bu.edu/



_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@...
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:11 pm

Show Message Option
mattdm@...
Send Email Send Email

Forward 		Message #12958 of 26827 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

Philosophy 101 Question: Does anyone know what standards might exist on generating Version and Release numbers for RPM spec files. ie. Version 1.2.3 Release... 		Michael J. Donahue
mdonahue@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
9:06 pm

... Version is for the version number of the packaged app, which you describe above. Release is for the the release number of the RPM itself, and should start...
mattdm@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
9:12 pm

... Doesn't 'Release' normally start at 1? -Ian _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@... ...
Ian Alexander
Ian.Alexander@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
9:18 pm

... Uh. Yes. Brain said "one", fingers said z-e-r-o. Dunno what's up with that. Sorry. -- Matthew Miller --->...
mattdm@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
9:20 pm

... That is up to the packager. You can start at: 0.0.0.0.0.0.1 if you like, or even use: 344lalkdjflaksdjfoaifjpoef It is pretty arbitrary. ... Mike A....
Mike A. Harris
mharris@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
11:37 am

... "Standards"?! It's a good thing you put that in the plural. I was under the impression that one "should" use the Version of the Source Code (and/or...
Mark Amidon
amidon@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
10:20 pm

... I've often wished for some kind of "style guide" like this. It seems reasonable to me, to only reset the release number when re-writing the spec file AND...
Wil Cooley
wcooley@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
10:35 pm

... [snip] ... Why would you bump the release number (4) when re-building for another RPM distro? There's nothing in the spec files that I change to rebuild ...
Gregory Leblanc
gleblanc@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
10:53 pm

... You'd bump the %{RELEASE} "number" just because this is a different "release" of the package. For example, do you really want the RedHat release of: ...
Mark Amidon
amidon@...
Send Email 		Feb 20, 2001
11:56 pm

Well, I would recommend removing autogenerated dependencies from a "production" spec file, anyway. I would recommend filling in the proper Requires (and...
Ian Alexander
Ian.Alexander@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
12:00 am

... This is much a personal taste thing, and depends on your experience. If something doesn't work, you change it until it does what you and your customers...
Mike A. Harris
mharris@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
11:36 am

... The autogenerated dependencies go into the binary RPM, not the spec file. Contrast your spec file with `rpm -qRp my-splufty-app-1-0.i386.rpm` to see the...
Mark Amidon
amidon@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
10:17 pm

... For very picky packaging wrto perl, you also need to add an epoch, as in Requires: perl >= 1:5.6.0 to avoid some unavoidable weirdness with epoch's...
Jeff Johnson
jbj@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
11:30 pm

... I'm sorry; what's the hazard of allowing skyrocketing release numbers? -- Mark Amidon | "Even within the walls of Microsoft, ...
Mark Amidon
amidon@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
10:17 pm

... Mainly personal preference. It is the same reason that software designers don't name their software versions like this: Version 1, Version 2, .... Version...
Mike A. Harris
mharris@...
Send Email 		Feb 24, 2001
8:41 pm

... We're talking the same thing here. When I said removing them from the spec file, I was talking about using "AutoReq: 0" (or whatever it is) in the spec...
Ian Alexander
Ian.Alexander@...
Send Email 		Feb 21, 2001
11:38 pm
< Prev Topic  |  Next Topic >
Message #
Search:
Advanced
Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help