[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Add information on version comparison to manpages

[Roman Kyrylych]

2008/6/20 Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com>:
> 2008/6/20 Nagy Gabor <ngaba at bibl.u-szeged.hu>:
>>
>> You may trust rpm guys, but don't forget that rpm based distros usually
>> use different versioning scheme, so '1.0b versus 1.0' is not a real
>> life example there:
>> alsa-lib-1.0.14-0.4.rc3.fc7.i386.rpm (Fedora)
>> mplayer-1.0-0.20.pre7.0.rh9.rf.i386.rpm (Fedora)
>>
>
> Yeah, I was also thinking about that.
> But what is strange is that in the rpm epoch link I just gave, they
> give an example that matches our situation.

Not to say that I think the new vercmp is "wrong" and the old one is "correct",
but

2008/6/15 Miklos Vajna <vmiklos at frugalware.org>:
> 1.0rc < 1.0 -> good
> 1.0pre < 1.0 -> good
> 1.0alpha < 1.0 -> good
> 1.0beta < 1.0 -> good
> 1.0a < 1.0 -> bad
> 1.0b < 1.0 -> bad
> 1.0b (if 'a' stands for alpha) < 1.0 -> good
> 1.0b (if 'b' stands for beta) < 1.0 -> good
>
> so it was 6 good vs 2 bad while now it's 6 bad vs 2 good, if i haven't
> miscounted something.

the old vercmp also maintains backwards compatibility,
i.e. packages that used to have options=('force') (e.g. samba) will
still have it,
and packages that used to not have options=('force') when using
*{rc,beta,pre} won't need it.
(I didn't counted anything though :-P).

I mostly dislike the change just because it will require
removing/adding options=('force') to packages
without a real need (IMO).
/me shrugs

-- 
Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)