Re: The use of epoch in version
others have given alternatives to the epoch already and I would follow
them. You can never get rid of an epoch again so think hard about adding
one for the first time. Now to the reason i reply:
Mats Erik Andersson <email@example.com> writes:
> In setting a positive epoch in the control file, I still notice
> that all package files are assigned a version that does not
> display the epoch-prefix "1:", yet I know that many packages
> brought in from a repository displays such prefixes. Could it be
> that the build daemons assign those?
The epoch contains a ':'. Since that is problematic character for some
filesystems (or operating systems where you might have to download debs
to for later installation). So is times long past someone decided that
filenames should not contain the epoch so the files wouldn't be
On the other hand when you download packages with apt it will rename
them to include the epoch but encodes the : to avoid filesystem
problems. The name of the file is really irelevant and dpkg only looks
what is inside the file in the DEBINA/control file.
Hope that explains what you see.