[arch-general] Pacman behaviour comparing numerical versions for package upgrades

[Allan McRae]

On 29/06/12 16:01, martin kalcher wrote:
> Am 29.06.2012 07:58, schrieb Allan McRae:
>> On 29/06/12 15:50, Myra Nelson wrote:

>>>      "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
> 
> So we dont need this:
> 
>>> I'm used to the warning package ??? local is newer than extra ???.
> 

Just to be clear:

pacman sees 1.5000 as being newer than 1.51 as 5000 > 51.  So that
warning is correct, because only perl package versioning thinks that
5000 < 51 ...

Allan