Re: Release-critical Bugreport for March 3, 2000
Paul Slootman wrote:
> The problem with epochs is that for some reason the epoch isn't included
> in the filename of the package, whereas the rest of the version number
> _is_.
>
> Any good reason why this is so? Perhaps this could be changed?
Epochs are glue that is needed to make something work. They're not meant to
be out in the open to confuse users. From the packaging manual:
`dpkg' will not usually display the epoch unless it is essential
(non-zero, or if the <upstream-version> contains a colon);
`dselect' does not display epochs at all in the main part of the
package selection display.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: