X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <49C58E11.9050600@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:02:09 +0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: {libhdf5_0,libhdf5-devel,hdf5}-1.6.8-{3,4} References: <65980.93034.qm@web25008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <65980.93034.qm@web25008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Marco Atzeri wrote: > --- Sab 21/3/09, Peter Rosin ha scritto: >>> Versions {libhdf5_0,libhdf5-devel,hdf5}-1.6.8-3 >> for cygwin-1.7 >>> {libhdf5_0,libhdf5-devel,hdf5}-1.6.8-4 for >> cygwin-1.5 >> >> Is it a good idea - longterm - to have lower numbers for >> cygwin-1.7? >> >> Cheers, >> Peter > > in this case is just by accident, usually I made reverse. > In any case it is only relevant that the two versions have a > different number to avoid confusion between packages. Given that the two are effectively in separate namespaces, and that 1.5 is unlikely to receive many more updates (if ever), I imagine the scope for it to cause trouble will be very limited. cheers, DaveK -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/