Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <04e601c19bbf$9d945f50$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From: "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <3C3EE6D5 DOT 8916443E AT wapme-systems DOT de> <72101602526 DOT 20020111144934 AT familiehaase DOT de> <3C3EF0C4 DOT 8E174E43 AT wapme-systems DOT de> <20020111151053 DOT G12057 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C401735 DOT 6B3F7B0D AT wapme-systems DOT de> <20020112190548 DOT U12057 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C407CC2 DOT 14A44B9C AT wapme-systems DOT de> <047c01c19bbe$a764d7e0$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20020112231545 DOT GA23748 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject: Re: [ANN] apache_1.3.22-2
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 10:19:41 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2002 23:19:37.0219 (UTC) FILETIME=[9A427530:01C19BBF]


===
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [ANN] apache_1.3.22-2


> On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 10:12:48AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >If you want to be able to have both apoache 1.3 and 2 installed
> >concurrently, then that is the only valid reason to use an
underscore -
> >and the result should look like
> >
> >apache_1-1.3.22-3
>
> Actually, the setup.exe code seems to equate '_' and '-' the same way.
> Unfortunately, I don't think that 'upset' is quite as forgiving but
> that's not a permanent problem, of course.
>
> So that means that the above package name would still be "apache" if
> I am reading things correctly.

It may - hmm I'll need to check. The above package name would be
'apache_1' - thus allowing the coexistence of it and 'apache_2'.

This should (of course) be rare and need group input before happening.

Rob