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

[Myra Nelson]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> 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

Allan:

Thanks. That was my assumption, but as engineers like to say "When you
assume something you make an ass out of u and me.

Myra

-- 
Life's fun when your sick and psychotic!