On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Angel Velásquez
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 29/06/12 02:58, Allan McRae wrote:
On 29/06/12 15:50, Myra Nelson wrote:
I have a question about pacman's behaviour regarding packges to be updated.
According to < $: man pacman >
You can also use pacman -Su to upgrade all packages that are out of date. See Sync Options below. When upgrading, pacman performs version comparison to determine which packages need upgrading.
Alphanumeric: 1.0a < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0p < 1.0pre < 1.0rc < 1.0 < 1.0.a < 1.0.1 Numeric: 1 < 1.0 < 1.1 < 1.1.1 < 1.2 < 2.0 < 3.0.0
That's very clear and makes sense. Here's where I'm confused. I build some of my perl pacakges with cpanpkgbuild -f XXX::XXX::YYY. The package from the official repos is: perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.5000-1-any.pkg.tar.xz
the package I built is: perl-datetime-format-strptime-1.51-1-any.pkg.tar.xz
I'm used to the warning package ??? local is newer than extra ???. But with the above referenced package I had to list it in the [ IgnorePkg ] line to keep pacman from trying to upgrade the package and still get this warning.
"Ignoring upgrade from perl-datetime-format-strptime from 1.51-1 to 1.5000-1"
No complaints as it's easy to fix, I was just wondering about the reasoning. I'll jump out on a limb here and assume it's because the repo package has 4 digits then the package version after the decimal point and my package has two digits then the package version after the decimal point. The developer changed his numbering scheme after 1.5000 to 1.51.
Is this the correct behaviour for pacman?
5000 > 51
Yes, some perl packages had that versioning schema, which is confusing.. that said, it's not a pacman bug.
- -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJP7UTaAAoJEEKh2xXsEzutrPcH/iRPp7SyqtS3XfSfnVq0qXGh 1ubC97p0LT3S2umtB3EojJ5HOCOvkCMCtASflSJW7yeCcv3jiExhSh2R0riQ2d29 3K/56Vhf0hMeNz3OJMgoUVgMicI4ulbWRswERXQqmd27WCqN1odMDJo6x564uC/9 sALz0wVPkqi5fdxtAStoUBIUaQl7OLsv9EdP9OZrttjvN6SmZfN5LQMWvK0qBMfz Y+5a2zT8LmkmUPvMO2VUBC9X9LvtALGPmsUILXzohXdJpjIRE3QsFUmQz1Ie98Vb Pio4Fk5GIcRmsv6hJZicYVXGHpkyZGUgYImIWDeWu1OAAdaaHqEs9+BU3yYslA8= =m/KC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Angel: I didn't think it was a pacman bug, "Bugs? You must be kidding, there are no bugs in this software", I was making sure I hadn't screwed something up along the way when I built my package. I should have added "Or did I screw something up?". Myra -- Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!