Comment 22 for bug 633742

I haven't said RPM sux. We have the situation that OE started with opkg, added dpkg, then rpm support. opkg has a defined approach to version numbers which is to follow debian unless it doesn't make sense for embedded use.

We can therefore choose to follow the debian approach, or, if I hear good arguments otherwise, we could patch dpkg and do something different. I'd prefer not to but its possible.

The one thing I want to see is that bitbake, opkg, dpkg and rpm have some kind of similar ideas about how to use the versions, at least in the environment we're using. I've seen what happens when they disagree and we're not doing it again ;-).

In summary I agree we need a good set of definitions and a good test set and those need to be created as part of this work. I worry if we're waiting on rpm to write those definitions, we may have a long wait as I see links with discussions back five years ago and little movement :(.