X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Delivered-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org
Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com (mail-ee0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC49CDC00D8
	for <alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:55:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ee0-f54.google.com with SMTP id c50so134287eek.13
        for <alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
         :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=uqFjvJ3BY9phicOC45FVqV39P952L7XfJWiLRuVKeY4=;
        b=fSI0VfFxuQCgoO6cuAPVMZLBiVZdT9pI49LHeLiNJTUqhx7VX1EbaTL78+6JUC4wxb
         j52JJ9bxg7MHCY77/TWD6BpSE/DxqJvRecWMxEb0lJmr6GKaJdVGIIaGV9ZfydnyAm1C
         OUYeC6ZlfysfVqf5q0gUIuBT/eEwy9HOmuTmbcUBglFAXTrN+zebUKxnvMb6lgk+33dZ
         XoKh9BU9LcTlpJCnz7j/ejk9dCO+J2vXZou4W74rvLNP+H+MzXs+ZV8qQb+DzJTlhouZ
         Ph8QrNK0J6nATvDqJ9ZhgkNQQ5hfLvbnBLFAFnk5Nuo5xIGTHjd6QH53R68uZxnH7QvZ
         u1qw==
Received: by 10.14.214.2 with SMTP id b2mr73155725eep.32.1351598143834;
        Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vostro ([2001:1bc8:101:f402:21c:23ff:fefc:bf0b])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i1sm1070008eeo.8.2012.10.30.04.55.42
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Timo_Ter=C3=A4s?= <timo.teras@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:54:27 +0200
From: Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi>
To: vkrishn4@gmail.com
Cc: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Questions about apk CMD -U
Message-ID: <20121030135427.78ec5489@vostro>
In-Reply-To: <201210301325.04001.vkrishn4@gmail.com>
References: <20121029181737.GB16841@vaio.jimpryor.net>
	<20121029225747.GD16841@vaio.jimpryor.net>
	<20121030080626.778185d0@vostro>
	<201210301325.04001.vkrishn4@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; i686-pc-linux-gnu)
X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel
Precedence: list
List-Id: Alpine Development <alpine-devel.lists.alpinelinux.org>
List-Unsubscribe: 
	<mailto:alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: 
	<mailto:alpine-devel+subscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=subscribe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:25:03 +0530 "V.Krishn" <vkrishn4@gmail.com>
wrote:

> > Perhaps we should fix the -rN field to allow decimal point for
> > "customized" builds or similar, like '-r1.1'. Any opinions on this?
> > Or any other ideas?
> 
> How does _pN suffix get applied?

It is part of the version string. Before -rN, but after the version.
E.g. 1.2.3_p1-r0.

> I mean , can it be any _<text>N? 

No.

Currently apk-tools handles: _cvs, _svn, _git, _hg, _p as "post"
version suffixes. Meaning they are considered higher version numbers
than if the version was without any suffix.

Additionally, suffixes: _alpha, _beta, _pre and _rc are considred "pre"
version suffixes, and considered as lesser version numbers as the same
version without any suffix.

> if not then '-r1.1' may not be very helpful, coz package name should
> indentify the packager in someway.

The problem with version numbers is that we need a way to identify
which is greater and which is lesser in unambiguous way.

If the source of the package is important, then the repository pinning
mechanism is more suitable.

-Timo


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---