| From: | Jean-Michel POURE <jm(dot)poure(at)freesurf(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Raphaël Enrici <blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Package naming conventions |
| Date: | 2003-08-09 19:21:24 |
| Message-ID: | 200308092121.24696.jm.poure@freesurf.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Friday 08 August 2003 17:21, Raphaël Enrici wrote:
> So shall the rpm packages, and
> may be some other, be rebuilt for this beta release ? If so, Jean Michel
> do you need some help concerning this work ?
Dear friends,
RPM packages are named:
name-version-release.rpm
A version can be 0.9.0, 0.9.1, etc...
The release number can be anything.
Both version and release number must exist.
You cannot have pgadmin3-0.9.0.rpm
but you can have:
pgadmin3-0.9.0-1.rpm
Because release number must exist and can be anything,
it does shock me to use a build date.
Besides, it proved to be very usefull for users, as read in the email:
"I use pgAdmin3 build date 200307..."
In my opinion, a beta is just a build date that we consider more stable than
others and declare beta. It is just a convention.
ANYWAY: I am rebuilding betas with pgadmin3-0.9.0-1.rpm and will upload them
during the night. It will take me some time because I have to rebuild
wxWindows as well. I missed the information to upgrade to 20030722...
Cheers,
Jean-Michel (from Bretagne!!!)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jean-Michel POURE | 2003-08-09 19:24:46 | Re: Package naming conventions |
| Previous Message | Raphaël Enrici | 2003-08-09 18:13:55 | Contributed packages and trust problem ? |