(what about PatchUpstreamStatus?) |
(request for a change (typo fix)) |
||
(8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{lang|en|es|page=Packaging_talk:Guidelines}} | |||
{{admon/tip|Here is [[Packaging:Committee#Guideline_Change_Procedure|the procedure for proposing changes to the guidelines]]. Simply commenting here may not do any good.}} | |||
== Broken internal links == | |||
Exceptions is used as an id to an <a> tag twice, and as a result, the two different links to #Exceptions (which should be different) do not work properly. | |||
Typo fix: [[Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning]] should be used instead of [[Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Version]] | |||
Look for string ",so" and change it to ".so". | Look for string ",so" and change it to ".so". | ||
Line 14: | Line 24: | ||
[[Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus]] | [[Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus]] | ||
--10: | --[[User:Till|Till]] 10:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
Noticed [[Packaging/Guidelines#tags]] has 2 broken links to www.rpm.org | |||
== Versioned Requires == | |||
Guideline states | |||
Second, the Epoch must be listed when adding a versioned dependency to achieve robust epoch-version-release comparison. A quick way to check the Epoch of package foo is to run: | |||
rpm --query --qf "%{EPOCH}\n" packagename | |||
However, if this returns (null), the package has no epoch. Therefore Requires: cannot include an epoch. |
Revision as of 09:35, 9 March 2012
Broken internal links
Exceptions is used as an id to an <a> tag twice, and as a result, the two different links to #Exceptions (which should be different) do not work properly.
Typo fix: Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning should be used instead of Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Version
Look for string ",so" and change it to ".so".
libs subpackages
Should there be some info on naming / reasons for having -libs subpackages in here somewhere?
Layout update.
In "Packaging Static Libraries" Could we get a layout update so that the points 1 and 2 both start on new lines.
Patch Upstream Status
Is this a Guideline? I guess so, because it is in the Packaging Namespace, but it is only linked from PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo
Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus --Till 10:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Noticed Packaging/Guidelines#tags has 2 broken links to www.rpm.org
Versioned Requires
Guideline states Second, the Epoch must be listed when adding a versioned dependency to achieve robust epoch-version-release comparison. A quick way to check the Epoch of package foo is to run:
rpm --query --qf "%{EPOCH}\n" packagename
However, if this returns (null), the package has no epoch. Therefore Requires: cannot include an epoch.