On 22 Jun 1998, Rob Browning wrote: > Good luck. It would be great if you come up with one, but I fear it's > going to be a lot of work for essentially a *really* minor aesthetic > gain. > > One way this could almost be handled is with and additional control > file where you could list sort exceptions. Something like this: > > 2.0.7pre1 < 2.0.7 > 2.0.8pre7 < 2.0.8 >
I like Santiago's suggestion better: 2.0.8pre1 => 2.0.7.99.1 2.0.8pre2 => 2.0.7.99.2 : 2.0.8 => 2.0.8 Which scales properly and solves the problem. > etc. This file would allow each discontinuity to be specified, and > would be pretty flexible, but it still has the problem (that epoch's > don't) that if the upstream authors do something really weird you're > still out of luck. The problem is that these rules aren't (time) > context sensitive. > > Consider some author releasing: > > 2.0 > 2.1 > 3.0 > 1.0 > 2.0 > > This is essentially a version renumbering (perhaps to match some other > package, or whatever). In this case, the exceptions list wouldn't > help because you'd still think the later 2.0 was equivalent to the > earlier 2.0 if. Here, something like epochs are needed. > Yes! Now I remember! This is what the epochs are for, and the reason that they MUST exist forever after. Also a reason not to use them in this case. Thanks for the reminder! Luck, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]