ebuild-names-for-prerelease-builds.htm

﻿<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="utf8" />
<title>How to construct ebuild names for prerelease builds?</title>
</head>
<body><a href="https://github.com/ArsenShnurkov/gentoo-mono-handbook"><img alt="Fork me on GitHub" id="forkme" src="images/forkme.png" align="right" width="100" /></a>

<table><tr><td style="vertical-align:top;">
<h1>How to construct ebuild names for prerelease builds?</h1>
</td><td style="vertical-align:top;">
<a href="index.htm">Gentoo Mono Handbook</a>
<br />
&nbsp;
</td></tr></table>

Sometimes it is neccessary to have an ebuild for software, which was not released yet.
<br />
<br />
This can be done by postfixing version number:
<br />
<br />
<a href="https://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/head/pms.html#x1-290003.2">https://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/head/pms.html#x1-290003.2</a>
<br />
zero <strong>or more</strong> of the suffixes _alpha, _beta, _pre, _rc or _p, which themselves may be followed by an optional integer. Suffix and integer count as separate version components. 
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_alpha
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_beta
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_pre
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_pre_p20160101
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_pre_p20160101-r1
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_pre_alpha_p20160101
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_pre_alpha_p20160101-r1
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_rc1
<br />
nunit-3.0.0_rc2
<br />
nunit-3.0.0
<br />
<br />
I am unsure about ordering of "_pre_alpha" and "_alpha". For me it looks like _pre_alpfa will be preferred when two versions of ebuild exists, which mean that the above naming scheme is not very good (<font style="color:red">need to check this</font>)
<br />
<br />
Also I am unsure about ordering of nunit-3.0.0 and nunit-3.0.0_p1 (looks like the latter supercedes the former, which is not correct)
</body>
</html>