[fedora-arm] Fedora 15 ARM hardfp status update & notes

[Henrik Nordström]

fre 2011-09-09 klockan 16:08 -0400 skrev Jonathan Masters:
> Only thing I would add is that we had been just adding "arm1" (no period) to NV*R* (release bit). I don't object rootfs your suggestion but we should standardize. Opinions?

To follow sane naming guidelines there need to be a period at least
before the added tag .arm1, if not it flows together with the release
tag resulting in a quite messy version (see yum)

not sure if it's meaningful or not to have the middle dot (arm.1). I
guess the NVR compare works correct in both cases, and looks better
without the dot.

But to avoid conflict with branch updates we should add a leading 0

  .0.arm1
or
  .0.arm.1

resuting in

  example-1.0-1.fc15.0.arm1

which works well even if there later is a branch specific bugfix
released in mainline.

  example-1.0-1.fc15         (mainline)
  example-1.0-1.fc15.0.arm1  (arm fixed)
  example-1.0-1.fc15.1       (mainline)
  example-1.0.1.fc15.1.arm1  (if needed.. hopefully not)

Regards
Henrik