From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (wildebeest.demon.nl [212.238.236.112]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD5B4398082E for ; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 10:36:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org BD5B4398082E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (83-87-18-245.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.87.18.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 589593000346; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 12:36:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CA0B2413CE02; Fri, 2 Jul 2021 12:36:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4aa74641b51259fdf123c4b95fb9626af8830d14.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: Please raise version number above RPM releases From: Mark Wielaard To: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny?= , debugedit@sourceware.org Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 12:36:53 +0200 In-Reply-To: <2b049bab787602c9bb5a42c9b39187a78ffbc241.camel@gentoo.org> References: <2b049bab787602c9bb5a42c9b39187a78ffbc241.camel@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: debugedit@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: debugedit development mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 10:36:57 -0000 Hi Micha=C5=82, On Sun, 2021-06-27 at 08:36 +0200, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > We've been packaging the RPM's debugedit executable as 'debugedit' > since 2006. This means that the versions of debugedit packages > in Gentoo have corresponded to RPM releases. >=20 > Now, we'd like to switch to your version. However, the problem is that > you've restarted versioning -- at least from our perspective. If we > added debugedit-0.3 to Gentoo today, it would be seen as an older > version that the 'old' debugedit-4.16.1.3 (i.e. rpm's debugedit). >=20 > There are hacks around this but they're all particularly ugly. Hence, > I'm wondering if it wouldn't be too much of a hassle to you to raise > the version number above the current RPM version, i.e. version 5.* or > 6.* (if you take rpm5 into consideration, it is pretty dead though). >=20 > While I do realize the problem's on our end, it's non-trivial to fix > because of backwards compatibility requirements we have. And as I said, > workarounds are particularly ugly and confusing, so I'd rather avoid > them if possible. Thanks for bringing that up. I think it is fine to make the first official release debugedit 5.0. It will make us look like a really mature project :) Before the first formal release I am doing a few more cleanups, just simple stuff like making sure we are checking all errors, etc. And I would like to make sure there are command line equivalents for the few remaining RPM environment variables used in find-debuginfo: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D27637 There is also one bug reported against Fedora where we fail to produce the main source file in some cases when processing DWARF5: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1966987 For which I have a partial patch, but I am unsure if it is complete. Cheers, Mark