This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: upset, genini: different version ordering

On Oct 20 14:33, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 20/10/2015 11:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Oct 19 20:13, Achim Gratz wrote:
> >>Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> >>>Switchable versioning schemes means that code has to be multiplied in
> >>>both setup and upset, which is just asking for problems.  There needs to
> >>>be one single versioning scheme, period, and using RPM's makes sense.
> >>
> >>You do know that RPM specifically has an emergency exit in the form of
> >>"serials", do you?
> >
> >I don't.  Brief description?
> This is a reference to the RPM "Serial:" tag
> This seems to be pretty obscure, but [1] says "Like the Epoch:, the Serial:
> directive should be a number that counts upward. Modern packages should use
> the Epoch: directive instead of Serial:, since Serial: has been deprecated
> for many, many rpm versions. "

Ok, so the match epoch-serial ends 1:0.

> >What about epoch handling as Yaakov
> >suggested, does that help?  Jon, as our local upset guru, how tricky
> >would it be to add epoches to upset?
> >
> >Or, in other words, how complicated would it be to have the same
> >RPM version handling in setup and upset both?
> I've done the first step, which is to change upset to use the same ordering
> as setup (which uses an RPM-like ordering)
> Patch not attached due to upset license uncertainties, but you can find it
> at /sourceware1/cygwin-staging/setup/0001-upset-Change-version-sorting.patch
> on sourceware.

You could sell me the moon if the contract is written in perl, so I'm
going to trust you here :)

> [2] is the list of packages whose ordering would change if this was used.
> On further study, it appears that upset is ordering all of these but
> tcl-itcl in the opposite order to the chronological (and presumably
> intended) order.

Just 6 packages.  This is a very overseeable list.  We might be able to
get away with simple manual changes to setup.hint or find out that the
reordering actually fixes things.  No reason not to go forward.

> Adding epoch parsing would be additional work.  I'm not sure how much value
> that would have since (a) we are effectively limited to 2 package versions,
> and (b) we can force a given ordering using setup.hint

Yaakov thinks we need epoch.  Yaakov, could you briefly outline why we
should need it?  Do we have real-world examples in the distro where we
could need it?  I guess Achim's perl packages are particulary nice


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: pgpf191fgvbfq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]