Re: Packages with unusual (wrong?) tarball names (db, xemacs)

["Dr. Volker Zell" <Dr dot Volker dot Zell at oracle dot com>]

>>>>> Max Bowsher writes:

    > The (adhoc?) standard for package file names, which for the most part
    > is followed, is:

    > NAME-VERSION-RELEASE.tar.bz2       <-- for binary packages
    > NAME-VERSION-RELEASE-src.tar.bz2    <-- for source packages

    > VERSION and RELEASE should not contain '-' characters.
    > NAME is allowed to contain '-' characters, but NAME should not contain
    > a '-'
    > character immediately followed by a digit, because this would look too
    > much like the start of VERSION.


    > There are a few packages in the distribution which do not follow these
    > rules:


    > !!! ./xemacs/xemacs-mule-sumo xemacs-mule-sumo-2005-05-05-1-src.tar.bz2
    > !!! ./xemacs/xemacs-mule-sumo xemacs-mule-sumo-2005-05-05-1.tar.bz2
    > !!! ./xemacs/xemacs-sumo xemacs-sumo-2005-05-05-1-src.tar.bz2
    > !!! ./xemacs/xemacs-sumo xemacs-sumo-2005-05-05-1.tar.bz2

    > ^^^ These packages' version fields contain illegal '-' characters.

In this case the version field is a date.

    > I'm not aware of any serious problems being created by these
    > discrepancies, but they are odd.

If there are no problems, I would like to leave it as is.

    > The db packages are unlikely to need any future update, so those might
    > need to stay as they are, but the xemacs packages could be fixed next
    > time they are updated.

    > Max.

Ciao
  Volker