Summary: | app-text/foo-123-bar-2.0017a_p-r5 valid according to pms, invalid according to portage | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Documentation | Reporter: | Peter Alfredsen (RETIRED) <loki_val> |
Component: | [OLD] Portage Documentation | Assignee: | PMS/EAPI <pms> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | dev-portage |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Peter Alfredsen (RETIRED)
2009-03-25 22:12:34 UTC
Hrm, why doesn't Portage accept this? Which bit specifically does it hate? Portage forbids names with version-like parts. pym/portage/versions.py: for x in myparts[:verPos]: if ververify(x): pkgcache[mypkg]=None return None #names can't have versiony looking parts *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 227265 *** |