On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 01:13:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 06/15/2015 12:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I did a bit of experimental packaging of Unison over the weekend, and
> -- proving the importance of creating a mock-up -- I came to realize
> why my proposal was wrong:
>
> - Subpackages would have the wrong version number. eg: If the main
> package was unison-2.48.3-1.fc23, the Unison 2.40 branch subpackage
> would have been called unison240-2.48.3-1.fc23 (containing only
> version 2.40.x).
You can set arbitrary version numbers on subpackages, so this isn't
really an issue.
Blimey, so you can. That's a pretty obscure feature of RPM! I wonder
if any packages use it? The packaging guidelines also seem to be
unaware of this feature.
> So I guess we're stuck with the old branches in separate
packages as
> now.
Another option would be to press upstream to support Unison across trust
boundaries, which would imply fixing the serialization protocol first
(it is currently horribly unsafe).
Agreed, but seems unlikely upstream are going to move to a documented,
secure, stable protocol any time this century.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog:
http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html