[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#645895: ftp.debian.org: epoch should be part of the .deb file name

On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> The first and obvious one is to avoid file name clashes in the
> archive. Another one is so the version number in the file name actually
> is the version number of the package which makes it less confusing when
> you need to download a package with an epoch by hand for whatever
> reason.

It will also break random scripts out there, so we might actually want to
have it very clear on how much benefit we'd get from this change.

> | > I would suggest %-encoding it, so foo-1:1 becomes foo_1%251_all.deb.
> | 
> | ... which then complicates any number of previously working regular
> | expressions in tools all over the place.
> You shouldn't trust the file name to contain the version number anyway.

What would be the point of it all, then?  We have never had a filename
version clash.  Even if it would eventually happen, it is best that the
maintainer bring it up for some brainstorming, because it CAN cause a lot of
annoyance (people are NOT often aware of epochs).

Anyway, we would indeed need to encode the epoch separator, as ":" causes
way too much trouble.

> | I think we should not have % characters in .deb filenames if at all
> | possible.
> Why not?  Are there any tools that have trouble with % characters in
> file names?

Well, while % is xml/xhtml/html-friendly, it is *not* http-friendly, and
will require double-encoding.

  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

Reply to: