[oe] RFC: Xorg Version Numbering

[pHilipp Zabel]

On 1/31/07, Graeme Gregory <dp at xora.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 10:46:19AM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote:
> > My question is therefore does it make sense to have X11R7.x in PV?
> >
> > If people want a build compatible with X11R.x, it would be easy to write
> > a preferred-version-X11R7.1.inc with the appropriate PREFERRED_VERSIONs
> > set. In fact you could have a script autogenerate that.
> >
> > I realise removing X11Rx from the PV will break upgrades but I think if
> > we don't do that, we could be storing up trouble in the long run which
> > we could change now.
> >
> My memory of why X11R7.X ended up in the PV is that at the time bitbake
> didnt support an epoch in the PV. This was a hack to make sure that xorg
> 6.X stuff upgraded to 7.X properly.
>
> I guess this opens the discussion on bitbake and epochs again.
>
> Graeme

Right, that was the reason.
I'd absolutely prefer to switch to the individual release versions and
set an epoch if somebody could add epoch support to bitbake.

regards
Philipp