Chad Walstrom wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 04:20:07PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > > That always struck me as a rather poor idea. What if we have two > > versions of a package, 1:1.0 and 2:1.0? Both will be foo_1.0_$ARCH.deb > > at the moment. > > IIRC, the actual filename in the archive is > > foo_1.0-${EPOCH}%3a${DEBVER}_${ARCH}.deb. No, they aren't. That IIRC is something apt does with the debs, but the epoch is _not_ in the filename of the debs in the archive.. Grüße/Regards, René -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature