[elrepo-devel] Legacy ATI 9.3 series drivers

[Dag Wieers]

On Tue, 21 Dec 2010, Phil Perry wrote:

> On 21/12/10 16:10, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Phil Perry<phil at elrepo.org>  wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> We are now looking at releasing an ATI legacy driver based on their 9.3
>>> series release (thanks again to Marco for contributing the packages).
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on the naming for this package? Our current (latest)
>>> release is named kmod-fglrx and fglrx-x11-drv. Legacy nvidia drivers are
>>> named kmod-nvidia-96xx and nvidia-x11-drv-96xx.
>>>
>>> So if we follow the style of naming we have used for the nvidia legacy
>>> series, we would name these packages:
>>>
>>> kmod-fglrx-93
>>> fglrx-x11-drv-93
>>>
>>> An alternative might be:
>>> kmod-fglrx93
>>> fglrx93-x11-drv
>>>
>>> Any thoughts/preferences?
>>
>> At first, I thought going for the nvidia style was good. However,
>> without the appended 'xx', the number 93 alone might make it look as
>> if it is part of the version/release number.  In that case, the second
>> option may be better.
>>
>> Akemi
>
> Yes, for example they would be:
>
> kmod-fglrx-93-9.3-1.el5.elrepo
> fglrx-x11-drv-93-9.3-1.el5.elrepo
>
> which does indeed have the potential to cause confusion.
>
> The alternative option being:
>
> kmod-fglrx93-9.3-1.el5.elrepo
> fglrx93-x11-drv-9.3-1.el5.elrepo
>
> which presumably would be less confusing?

My preference is the second for the same reason as Akemi's. Even though 
there is ambiguity if you know how to parse it (ie. version and release 
cannot contain a dash).

-- 
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, info at dagit.net, http://dagit.net/

[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]