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