From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1Epe6x-0005Fv-OV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 04:00:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jBN3xmfp008975; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 03:59:48 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jBN3w07i020706 for ; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 03:58:00 GMT Received: from c-67-171-150-177.hsd1.or.comcast.net ([67.171.150.177] helo=[192.168.1.106]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1Epe47-0005H2-Q3 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 03:57:59 +0000 Message-ID: <43AB75C6.4070409@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 19:57:58 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051219) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it) References: <43AA3AF6.6000903@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <43AA3AF6.6000903@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c88c64dc-1109-4753-b3fc-a07de4122a67 X-Archives-Hash: 304aafcb4527cfa178ed3edaadd2a15c -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Donnie Berkholz wrote: | I'd appreciate some ideas better than what I've come up with so far to | deal with the very strange X.Org release naming. | | When modular tarballs are part of a full X.Org release (7.0, 7.1, etc), | then they are named PN-PV-XORG_RELEASE.tar.(gz|bz2) and S matches. When | modular tarballs are independently released outside a full X.Org | release, they are named the standard way -- PN-PV.tar.(gz|bz2), same for S. Through working with upstream and other distributors, we've come to the conclusion that having upstream provide both versioned and unversioned tarballs is the best solution and avoids this issue entirely. Take-home point: When upstream does annoying crap, talk to them about it. And when they disagree, find some friends and talk to them again. Thanks, Donnie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDq3XGXVaO67S1rtsRAtDPAJ0dfkHjlHM7HXm4+yriap0Va7LLOQCfVQOF EBuHuJq5oF+TvRyfemchAkg= =+bQu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list