Subject: Re: Valid package names
To: Hubert Feyrer <email@example.com>
From: Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/13/1999 12:23:31
Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Sep 1999, Simon Burge wrote:
> > I'm working on the source-code version of bladeenc, and not sure what
> > the valid package name is. At the moment, I have:
> > DISTNAME= bladeenc-082-src-stable-2
> > PKGNAME= bladeenc-0.82pl2
> > and pkglink gives a fatal on the "-0.82pl2" version. It's passes
> > "-0.82" ok, but this is second patchlevel of 0.82. Based on some
> > private mail from Hubert for the postfix package, I thought that
> > "N.NNN-plN" was valid - is pkglint being too strict? Any hints?
> I've just checked some package with pkglint-1.73 that I've set
> PKGNAME= bladeenc-0.82pl2
> and it worked fine for me. Indeed, the version you suggest is what looks
> perfect to me. Maybe upgrade your pkglint?
I tried that before sending my message - my pkglint is currently:
pkglint-1.75 A verifier for NetBSD package directory.