Update Packs - stop confusion

Forum for anything else which doesn't fit in the above forums. Site feedback, random talk, whatever, are welcome.
Post Reply
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:33 pm
Location: Victorville, California

Update Packs - stop confusion

Post by ChiefZeke » Thu May 08, 2008 12:35 am

I'd like to make a suggestion on applying Update Pack version numbers - as those for XP SP2 start with a 2 and are now at 2.2.2 could the Update Packs for SP3 start at 3.0.0 and go up from there?

I'm asking this because I just have this feeling there will be any number of questions asking about Update Packs and what are they compatible with and I am hoping this numbering option will help eliminate 'dumb' questions. :D

User avatar
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:39 pm
Location: Arkansas, USA

Post by crashfly » Thu May 08, 2008 1:20 am

lol - I do not think the "dumb" questions will *ever* be eliminated from humans. ;)
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.

How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 4621
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:38 pm
Location: Riverview, MI USA

Post by 5eraph » Thu May 08, 2008 1:33 am

It's not really a dumb question. The only stupid questions are those that are allowed to go unasked and unanswered. :P

I'm not going to rant again about versioning, but Ryan seems to have a good system going:
5eraph wrote:The Update Pack versioning is about as good as it gets. Here's the logic:
    • RVM_UpdatePack_2.1.9.7z where the versions are a.b.c.
  1. Major version number - The number of times the pack has been built from scratch.
  2. Minor version number - This is incremented when the current Update Pack cannot be integrated into a previously RVMed source.
  3. Subversion number - The number of times the pack has been updated since the last minor version increase.
If an Update Pack needs to be fixed then lowercase letters are added to the subversion to indicate this.
Starting an SP3 pack at 3.0.0 would break this. Ryan has said he will still be releasing post-SP2 packs, and they did not start at 2.0.0.

Instead, Ryan has begun to use the following convention:
  • RVMUpdatePackSP2_2.2.2.7z
where the service pack to be updated is given in the file name.

Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 6:40 pm

Post by Lumina » Thu May 08, 2008 6:52 pm

I actually like the idea of starting at version 3.0.0 it makes a lot of sense
cant think of anything to put.

Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 11:31 am

Post by newsposter » Thu May 08, 2008 9:04 pm


00.08.06 would be an RvM pack for SP3 (post) release in 2008/month 06
Last edited by newsposter on Fri May 09, 2008 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 763
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post by roirraWedorehT » Thu May 08, 2008 9:07 pm

newsposter wrote:ServicePack.Year.Month

0.08.06 would be an RvM pack for SP3 (post) release in 2008/month 06
Huh? Do you mean 3.08.06?

Anyway, my two cents: I don't really care what version number system anyone decides to use for these update packs. It's normally in the topic what the update pack is for ("Post-SP2", "Post-SP3"...). The authors can use whatever method that keeps them sane. I haven't had any confusion myself, at least not about Update Packs. :twisted:

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:07 pm
Location: Planet Earth

Post by Siginet » Fri May 09, 2008 10:37 am

newsposter wrote:ServicePack.Year.Month

0.08.06 would be an RvM pack for SP3 (post) release in 2008/month 06
My UpdatePacks follow a method sort of like this. It has the SP in the name and the version number is Year Month (Day if more than one release that month).

Your Virtual Technician
Computer Management Software

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 5190
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:03 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Post by RyanVM » Sun May 11, 2008 7:07 pm

SP3 pack will be starting with 1.0.0. The filename will say SP3 in it the same way that the 2.2.2 SP2 pack does.
Get up to $200 off on hosting from the same people who host this website!

Post Reply