[users] Dropping the repotag

Jeff Johnson n3npq at mac.com
Sun Mar 18 18:57:05 CET 2007


On Mar 18, 2007, at 1:38 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, Dag Wieers wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, Andreas Rogge wrote:
>>
>>> What I actually argue is that using the revision tag for it  
>>> sucks. You
>>> can write arbitrary strings into the revision and these repotags  
>>> are not
>>> required and they are only line noise to the package manager  
>>> (same for
>>> disttags).
>>
>> Same for name, version and release. They are not required and could
>> therefor be removed from the filename. At some point in the past SuSE
>> didn't have version and release tags in their RPM filenames.
>>
>> The directory listing were slimmer :)
>
> In fact, IIRC, they didn't have architecture tags either. So it  
> would be:
>
> 	glibc.rpm
> 	glibc-devel.rpm
>
> I'm wondering if that had anything to do with ISO limitations back  
> then.

Yep. SuSE packages were distributed using 8.3 file names originally.

> Or maybe to reduce bandwidth usage :)
>

Trivial and pointless bw savings.

73 de Jeff



More information about the users mailing list