[iPAQ] Re: [Familiar] Annouce: BlueZ packages...

From: Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm.a.t.rice.edu>
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 10:18:16 EST

On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 11:54:23AM +0000, Philip Blundell wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 19:12, Nils Faerber wrote:
> > Hi!
> > I have just uploaded some updated BlueZ bluetooth packages to unstable.
> > Reason was to remove the need for glib-1.2 from the existing packages
> > and to update PAN. I have uploaded: bluez-utils_2.2-kc1_arm.ipk
> > bluez-sdp_1.0-kc1_arm.ipk
> > and
> > bluez-pan_1.1rc1-kc1_arm.ipk
> >
> > Utils and SDP are now linked against glib2.
>
> Excellent, thanks for taking care of this.
>
> Unfortunately your sdp package has fallen victim to the way ipkg
> interprets version numbers: "1.0-kc1" compares as lower than
> "1.0rc3-hh1". I have moved the old package out of the feed, so new
> installations should pick up the right one, but anybody attempting to
> upgrade will need to manually uninstall the old version.

Hmm, debian has 'epochs' to handle this sort of problem - you prepend a
number and a colon to the version number, so the one above would become:

bluez-sdp_1:1.0-kc1_arm.ipk

The downside is that once you've used an epoch, you're stuck using
it forever. According to my current 'available' file, ~ 7% of debian
packages have a epoch.

Doesn't ipkg handle epochs? If not, it's mis-handling the .debs people
throw at it.

Ross
Received on Wed Feb 26 15:18:46 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 04 2004 - 09:45:01 EDT