On 21.01.2011 15:49, Dan McGee wrote:
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Florian Pritz <bluewind@server-speed.net> wrote:
On 19.01.2011 19:54, Dan McGee wrote:
It is most definitely not a valid pkgver (dash) or pkgrel (not a number).
The dash here just seperates pkgver from pkgrel.
Did a quick test with libc.so=6-x86_64_Linux as dependency and a package called libc.so with that pkgver and pkgrel and it worked just fine.
Perhaps more importantly, this is still wrong (I can't run your i686 binary on my i386 system as it seems to indicate)
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2010-February/010410.html
and if we do keep it, it has *nothing* to do with a version in the normal ordering sense- it would belong as part of the provision name.
I had that before and Allan didn't like it. http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2010-February/010420.html -- Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}@server-speed.net