On Fri, Aug 23, 2024, at 8:31 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

Hi,

I wonder if it's allowed to use pkgrel for the upstream version? If so, then there is no correct information related to the pkgrel available, see

https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon-bin

My comment, including a correction ;) at the bottom: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/firedragon#comment-987718

"Hi,

please, don't misuse the package release for the unusual versioning of upstream.

If upstream's versioning is 1.2.3-1 then make the pkgver 1.2.3.1, if it's 1.2.3-1.1 then make the pkgver 1.2.3.1.1. For example take a look at how it is done for extra/linux-rt or extra/linux-rt-lts.

Leave the pkgrel to the package release -1, -2, -3 and leave dotted pkgrel to the users, so a user can build an individual -1.1, -1.2 etc. and automatically follow the AUR, if the package maintainer bumps the pkgver or pkgrel.

Don't break the pkgrel, just because upstream does use such an odd versioning. The pkgrel is for the package release, not for the upstream version.

Regards, Ralf

Correction: Replace the "-" by a "_", see https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD#pkgver "

After taking a look at the Wiki I corrected my comment. IIUC then the pkgver of extra/linux-rt or extra/linux-rt-lts isn't correct,too, but at least a correct pkgrel is provided by those packages from extra, while it's broken for the AUR's firedragons.

Regards, Ralf

The librewolf and librewolf-bin packages do this as well which is quite annoying. I have my own build system that imports from the aur and I have to bump the pkgrel from time to time for various reasons, and to work around the use of the pkgrel for the upstream version I've had to do a global replace for pkgrel to something else and then add my own pkgrel in.