On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:47:36PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
that dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'
also sprach Michael Biebl [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.08.11.0012 +0100]:
1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-)
Why not continue to current versioning scheme until 0.10 is out to
avoid the epoch?
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 08:30:45AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach Michael Biebl [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006.08.11.0012 +0100]:
1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users wouldn't be happy ;-)
Why not continue to current versioning scheme until 0.10 is out to
avoid the epoch?
Yeah
Michael Biebl writes (dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now
supports ~ in version numbers]):
Reading this announcement I thought, great and wanted to start using
'~', only to discover that dpkg believes that 0.09+0.1.svn 0.1~svn.
1.) Wait for a 0.10 release. I think my users
Florian Weimer wrote:
* martin f. krafft:
Thanks to the work of our DPL Anthony aj Towns (and all the other
people who have worked on this without my knowledge), I am happy to
announce that dak, our archive management software, finally supports
the use of the tilde ('~') in version numbers.
* Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
that dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9' yields true, which I
think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to
0.9 will be considered 0.09+0.1.
0.09 = 0.9 means:
0 == 0
and
. == .
and
09 ==
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200, Michael Biebl [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
If it's not a bug in dpkg, could someone please elaborate on the
reasoning of this behaviour. I'd be grateful for any comments and
replies.
It's documented in Policy 5.6.12 [1]. Substrings composed of digits are
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
that dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9' yields true, which I
think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to
0.9 will be considered 0.09+0.1.
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:12:59AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
I have to admit that when choosing 0.09+0.1 as version number I didn't
check with dpkg --compare-versions because then I would have discovered
that dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9' yields true, which I
think is rather odd,
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
right of the decimal, making the zero significant.
Er, read Policy 5.6.12.
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
right of the decimal, making the zero significant.
Er, read Policy 5.6.12.
I have read it. I was
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:47:36PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]:
that dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9' yields true, which I
think is rather odd, because it means
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:37:47PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:04AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
* Roberto C. Sanchez [Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:47:36 -0400]:
Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the
right of the decimal, making
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to
do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software
developers, not mathematicians.
Or, to put it another way: your numbers are not
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:47:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to
do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software
15 matches
Mail list logo
