Re: netcdf again
> On Friday 02 February 2007 19:10, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>> One cautionary note: If you go with 3.6.2~beta6 for an upstream version,
>> your build directory will be named netcdf-3.6.2~beta6. ÂI remember that
>> some libtool versions don't like directory names that include tildes [0]
>> ... might that be a problem? ÂIf this is so, it could be necessary to
>> re-libtoolize the source with Debian's libtool [1,2].
>
> Even after re-libtoolizing, the version scheme above causes failures in the
> build for me.
Ugh.
Unless any libtool experts have a quick fix to suggest, maybe then the
version scheme could be something like this:
3.6.1-1 (existing version in Debian)
...
3.6.1+3.6.2.beta6-1~pre1 (your unofficial releases)
3.6.1+3.6.2.beta6-1~pre2
...
3.6.1+3.6.2.beta6-1 (official upload to Debian)
3.6.1+3.6.2.beta6-2
...
3.6.1+3.6.2.beta7-1 (new upstream beta release)
...
3.6.2-1 (final upstream 3.6.2 release)
where the orig.tar.gz's are named netcdf_3.6.1+3.6.2.beta6.orig.tar.gz etc.
The problem with this scheme is of course that the version numbers are
really ugly. But at least they are monotonically increasing and don't
require an epoch.
best regards,
--
Kevin B. McCarty <kmccarty@princeton.edu> Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
Reply to: