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

Re: RFS: kio-ftps (updated package)

Le mercredi 15 avril 2009 à 16:40, Paul Wise a écrit :
> 2009/4/15 Laurent Léonard <laurent@open-minds.org>:
> > So the final version number for the package should be 0.2+dfsg-2 (0.2-1
> > already exists in Sid) ?
> Yep.
> > What is the difference between ".dfsg", "-dfsg" and "+dfsg" suffixes ?
> > With or without the "-" character after "dfsg" ?
> Sorting. 1.2.dfsg sorts after 1.2.1 but 1.2+dfsg/1.2-dfsg/1.2dfsg sort
> before 1.2.1. See dpkg --compare-versions and debian-policy.

So ".dfsg" is a bad suffix ? And "+dfsg" should be used in priority ? If 
1.2+dfsg/1.2-dfsg/1.2dfsg sort before 1.2.1 why are there different 
suffixes ? I don't find clear informations about that on the Debian policy...

> > The only reason I see that could be invoked to drop, or 0.2dfsg1-2 or
> > similar "*~" files is the archive size, I'm not sure it is justifiable
> > for a 50 KB archive...
> If you're already repacking due to non-free stuff you can remove
> whatever else you want to remove.


> > I'm almost sure it is impossible to reupload the source tarball, I read
> > that somewhere in the documentation. And it seems to be logic if several
> > package revisions use a diff file based on it.
> If you bump the upstream version (by appending dfsg1 or similar) that
> means a new upstream tarball.

OK, and why "dfsg1" and not simply "dfsg" ?

Laurent Léonard

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: