On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 09:21:14AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Andrey Rahmatullin <[email protected]> writes: > > Unless it has some other reasons than just "lower version". > > This causes a ton of headaches for the archive software. IIRC, I believe > dak is rather unhappy about version numbers going backwards, and of course > apt is going to have no idea what to do for a system that already has the > previous package installed. [...] Version numbers should be monotonically > increasing, and I think it's reasonable for a lot of software to bake in > the assumption that's the case.
Right. I made a note that when I'm going to throw my next tantrum, NMUing dpkg and apt to version 2147483647:zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... might be a lot of fun. TODO: check what's the longest allowed version length. (More seriously: with two techniques for non-monotonic versions, we don't need a third one.) Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 10 people enter a bar: ⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ • 1 who understands binary, ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ • 1 who doesn't, ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ • and E who prefer to write it as hex.
