On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 06:57:03PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>>>>>> "PP" == Philip Prindeville
> PP> Well, I've (a) tried to get the owners to rename the tarball with
> PP> an embedded version number, so far without success, and (b) went
> PP> looking through the maintainers wiki on how to handle cases where
> PP> the tarball isn't versioned (and it must be done manually) but
> PP> didn't find it.
> You just deal with it the hard way. CVS (or the sources mechanism, at
> least) has no problems dealing with unversioned upstream source. The
> burden on the packager is higher but it's not really all that
> difficult to deal with. It does make upstream source comparisons
> mostly useless, though, so we lose an important means of verification
> but this isn't something the maintainer can solve.
> If you asked upstream and they don't care then you've done what you
> can do.
> - J<
Yeah, about that... they don't seem to be using CVS upstream... If
they're using SVN, then they don't publish a public interface.
If you are after a date to use as a version number, then use the mtime
of the tarball. Get it with wget -N to preserve timestamps (curl has
similar options). If the download is broken timestamp-wise (like it is
for asterisk/zaptel etc. for example), then use the date of the newest
file in the tarball.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net