Re: libc6_2.0.7 release notes...
Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> writes:
> I was just using that as an example of an existing package that had multiple
> minuses in the version.
>
> I didn't make it up, I got it out of hamm:
>
> hamm/hamm/binary-all/doc/libc6-pre2.1-doc_2.0.93-980414-1.deb
Well, it's definitely broken. Totally unclear what the Debian
revision is. Sounds like a good thing for lintian to be checking.
Using package names or version numbers that violate our standard could
get us in all kinds of trouble...
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: