[pacman-dev] version number parsing broken(?), 3.1901-1 > 3.23-1
Hi! This morning I stumbled over the following message : warning: perl-html-tree: local (3.1901-1) is newer than community (3.23-1) Is this intentional (I guess not) or is the version number parsing broken? Thanks in advance, Gergely
warning: perl-html-tree: local (3.1901-1) is newer than community (3.23-1)
Forgot to mention, pacman 3.0.0-rc1 . Gergely
On 3/6/07, Tamas, Gergely
warning: perl-html-tree: local (3.1901-1) is newer than community (3.23-1)
Forgot to mention, pacman 3.0.0-rc1 .
Are you telling me that isn't correct? Think like a computer here. Is 1901 > 23? Sure sounds like it to me. Version number schema changes like this are the packages deal, not pacman's. -Dan
Hi!
Are you telling me that isn't correct?
Think like a computer here. Is 1901 > 23? Sure sounds like it to me. Version number schema changes like this are the packages deal, not pacman's.
I was more thinking of floats here. 3.1901 < 3.23 Gergely
On 3/6/07, Tamas, Gergely
I was more thinking of floats here. 3.1901 < 3.23
Floats don't work If I have 3.1 installed, then 3.9 comes out and then 3.10, does that make them equal?
On 3/6/07, Tamas, Gergely
Hi!
Are you telling me that isn't correct?
Think like a computer here. Is 1901 > 23? Sure sounds like it to me. Version number schema changes like this are the packages deal, not pacman's.
I was more thinking of floats here. 3.1901 < 3.23
Well we can think of this however we want, and there will be a package that breaks it. In your case, Udev. is udev 99 < udev 100? It isn't getting fixed, because frankly there is no 'right' way to fix it. What should have happened is 3.1901 -> 3.19.01, instead of confusing floating point version numbers. Proof that version numbering is not always floating can be found with CVS as well- it will increment straight from 1.99 to 1.100 without a problem. -Dan
Hi! Yes, the package maintainer should "correct" the unusual version naming by set 3.19.01 or similar as package version. Bye, Nagy Gabor
Hi! Yes, the package maintainer should "correct" the unusual version naming by set 3.19.01 or similar as package version. Bye, Nagy Gabor Once again, no right way of doing this. How do we know if the real
On Mar 6, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Nagy Gabor wrote: package version is 3.19.01 and not 3.1.901 or 3.190.1. This isn't a thing pacman should have to take care of; the package itself should have a "current" version number. ~ Jamie / yankees26
You can safely ignore everything I just said, I misinterpreted what Nagy said. ~ Jamie / yankees26
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dan McGee
-
James Rosten
-
Nagy Gabor
-
Tamas, Gergely