On Friday, 4 January 2013 at 19:59:19 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, January 04, 2013 20:30:28 Rob T wrote:
Absolutely! Otherwise someone is going to think v2.062 is
greater
than v2.062.1. Guaranteed. I already got semi-confused looking
at
the latest download page and I know what's going on far more
than
Joe Smith who walks in tomorrow checking out D for the first
time.
Really? Why on earth would you think that 2.062 was greater
than 2.062.1?
Also, I believe that it's very common with Linux packages (and
probably the
projects themselves) to do that sort of versioning where
there's never a .0
and the last part only gets added when you actually get a .1.
- Jonathan M Davis
Both debian and ubuntu uses version.of.software-packageversion
For instance :
$ apt-cache policy audacious
audacious:
Installé : 3.2.4-1
Candidat : 3.2.4-1
Table de version :
3.3.3-2 0
10 http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/ experimental/main
amd64 Packages
*** 3.2.4-1 0
990 http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/ testing/main amd64
Packages
150 http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main amd64
Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
2.3-2 0
800 http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64
Packages
3.2.4 is the version of audacious. 1 is the version of the
package. Distro rarely interfers with the version of the software
itself and simply resuse what software devs choose, adding their
own system on top of it.
