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: <3C40CB97.1040107@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 18:49:43 -0500
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANN] apache_1.3.22-2
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'd like to put in a vote for NOT treating '_' and '-' identically. 
While it is easy to use "apache1" and "apache2" instead of "apache_1" 
and "apache_2" -- it isn't so easy for packages (like bzip2) that 
already end with a numeral.  I'm specifically thinking of: splitting 
bzip2 into a bzip2 and libbzip2 package, to allow multiple libbzip2 
(DLLs) to coexist.
   libbzip20 and libzip21 are misleading, whereas
   libbzip2_0 and libbzip2_1 are clear.

In fact, I *thought* setup/upset didn't treat '_' any differently than 
'a' but perhaps I was wrong...

--Chuck

Christopher Faylor wrote:

> 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.
> 
> cgf
> 
> 
> 
>>Rob
>>
>>===
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Stipe Tolj" <tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de>
>>To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
>>Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 5:13 AM
>>Subject: Re: [ANN] apache_1.3.22-2
>>
>>
>>
>>>Corinna Vinschen schrieb:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 06:53:43PM +0100, Stipe Tolj wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>No I don't think so. I'll change the /etc path thing and
>>>>>
>>re-package to
>>
>>>>>apache_1.3.22-3, now!
>>>>>
>>>>apache-1.3.22-3, please!
>>>>
>>>>A dash, no underscore.
>>>>
>>>Apache distributions do use a underscore, BTW. I know this will make
>>>problems with setup.exe I guess, so I'll change the tarballs to use a
>>>dash instead.
>>>
>>>Stipe
>>>
>>>tolj AT wapme-systems DOT de
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>Wapme Systems AG
>>>
>>>M?nsterstr. 248
>>>40470 D?sseldorf
>>>
>>>Tel: +49-211-74845-0
>>>Fax: +49-211-74845-299
>>>
>>>E-Mail: info AT wapme-systems DOT de
>>>Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>wapme.net - wherever you are
>>>
>>>
>