On 20/10/2015 14:33, Jon Turney wrote:
On 20/10/2015 11:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
What about epoch handling as Yaakov
suggested, does that help? Jon, as our local upset guru, how tricky
would it be to add epoches to upset?
Or, in other words, how complicated would it be to have the same
RPM
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 18:45 +0200, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> >> and I don't see why any of you would like the idea.
> >
> > Because it is a well-established solution for the same issue on other
> > platforms.
>
> I have never seen this used (I don't claim it isn't used
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
>> and I don't see why any of you would like the idea.
>
> Because it is a well-established solution for the same issue on other
> platforms.
I have never seen this used (I don't claim it isn't used somewhere, mind
you) and I still can't think of a good reason for why
On Oct 19 20:13, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> > Switchable versioning schemes means that code has to be multiplied in
> > both setup and upset, which is just asking for problems. There needs to
> > be one single versioning scheme, period, and using RPM's makes sense.
>
> You
On Oct 20 12:03, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 17:50 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > Adding epoch parsing would be additional work. I'm not sure how much
> > > value
> > > that would have since (a) we are effectively limited to 2 package
> > > versions,
> > > and (b) we
Jon Turney writes:
>> All of this is already existing in Cygwin,
>
> It exists in upset, but not in way that anyone can rely on working the
> way they think it's going to, since the implementation is bewildering
> and undocumented.
I was talking about the sort of version numbering schemes that
On Oct 20 14:33, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 20/10/2015 11:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Oct 19 20:13, Achim Gratz wrote:
> >>Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> >>>Switchable versioning schemes means that code has to be multiplied in
> >>>both setup and upset, which is just asking for problems. There
On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 17:50 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Adding epoch parsing would be additional work. I'm not sure how much value
> > that would have since (a) we are effectively limited to 2 package versions,
> > and (b) we can force a given ordering using setup.hint
>
> Yaakov thinks
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> In short, xdelta was updated from 1.x to 3.x, then it was realized that
> both were needed, and so xdelta was reverted to 1.x and xdelta3 was
> created. Instead of saying "oh btw you need to revert xdelta to 1.x
> yourself" (which is all we could do currently), the
On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 21:53 +0200, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> > In short, xdelta was updated from 1.x to 3.x, then it was realized that
> > both were needed, and so xdelta was reverted to 1.x and xdelta3 was
> > created. Instead of saying "oh btw you need to revert xdelta to
On 20/10/2015 11:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Oct 19 20:13, Achim Gratz wrote:
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
Switchable versioning schemes means that code has to be multiplied in
both setup and upset, which is just asking for problems. There needs to
be one single versioning scheme, period, and
On 19/10/2015 18:19, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
I don't really want to spend effort on unravelling the complexities of the
sorting that upset does, since I don't think it's worth keeping, and we
should switch to a scheme which can be described in a paragraph,
e.g. the scheme
On Oct 9 14:24, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 20/07/2015 19:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
> >On 20/07/2015 19:03, Achim Gratz wrote:
> >>I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
> >>For perl-Carp, genini produces:
> [...]
> >If I recall correctly, genini is just broken, doing some
Yaakov Selkowitz writes:
> Switchable versioning schemes means that code has to be multiplied in
> both setup and upset, which is just asking for problems. There needs to
> be one single versioning scheme, period, and using RPM's makes sense.
You do know that RPM specifically has an emergency
On Mon, 2015-10-19 at 19:19 +0200, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
> >> I don't really want to spend effort on unravelling the complexities of the
> >> sorting that upset does, since I don't think it's worth keeping, and we
> >> should switch to a scheme which can be described in a
Corinna Vinschen writes:
>> I don't really want to spend effort on unravelling the complexities of the
>> sorting that upset does, since I don't think it's worth keeping, and we
>> should switch to a scheme which can be described in a paragraph,
>> e.g. the scheme used by setup and RPM:
>>
>>
On 20/07/2015 19:10, Jon TURNEY wrote:
On 20/07/2015 19:03, Achim Gratz wrote:
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
For perl-Carp, genini produces:
[...]
If I recall correctly, genini is just broken, doing some kind of lexical
sort which e.g. sorts 1.10
On Aug 24 09:27, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 22 17:11, Achim Gratz wrote:
> > Corinna Vinschen writes:
> > > What cgit web page? I only see perfectly valid https links on, e.g,
> > >
> > > https://sourceware.org/git/?p=cygwin-run.git;a=summary
> >
> > I'm talking about the URLs for
On Aug 24 06:25, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 12:37 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
The idea that we need different way of sorting version strings for
different packages seems really strange.
Does any other distro have something like this? How do linux distros
handle the
Corinna Vinschen writes:
On Fedora, some Perl packages add extra dots to the package version so
that they sort as expected, e.g.:
0.23 = 0.23
0.2301 = 0.23.01
0.24 = 0.24
etc.
So, shouldn't we do the same?
Please not, a dumb idea doesn't get smarter by repeating it's bad parts.
The
On Aug 22 17:11, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
What cgit web page? I only see perfectly valid https links on, e.g,
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=cygwin-run.git;a=summary
I'm talking about the URLs for cloning the repo on the top of that
page. It lists a URL for HTTP
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 12:37 +0100, Jon TURNEY wrote:
The idea that we need different way of sorting version strings for
different packages seems really strange.
Does any other distro have something like this? How do linux distros
handle the special version number sorting requirements that
Achim Gratz writes:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Disregard the above, use these instead:
git clone cygwin.com:/git/cygwin-genini.git
git clone cygwin.com:/git/cygwin-run.git
Thanks. I'll try to get run up-to-date w.r.t. the released version over
the weekend.
Done.
Regards,
Achim.
--
Corinna Vinschen writes:
I need an overseer to create the final symlink to access the repo
The cgit web-page lists http:// URL for repos on sourceware, but you'll
generally end up with a 403 if you try to use them. That's bad for
folks behind firewalls, so it would be nice if that could be
Corinna Vinschen writes:
What cgit web page? I only see perfectly valid https links on, e.g,
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=cygwin-run.git;a=summary
I'm talking about the URLs for cloning the repo on the top of that
page. It lists a URL for HTTP access that doesn't actually work:
On Aug 19 10:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Aug 18 22:06, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Comments? On perl code? You're kidding...
Well, maybe not from you personally, to save you the exasperation. :-)
Heh, yeah.
You know, if you're willing to improve the long
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Disregard the above, use these instead:
git clone cygwin.com:/git/cygwin-genini.git
git clone cygwin.com:/git/cygwin-run.git
Thanks. I'll try to get run up-to-date w.r.t. the released version over
the weekend.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305
On 18/08/2015 19:34, Achim Gratz wrote:
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
Here's a patch for genini that will take care of the versions in a
better way than before, and it's extensible (in genini) and configurable
(from setup.hint) if you're into that kind
Jon TURNEY writes:
The idea that we need different way of sorting version strings for
different packages seems really strange.
To me the idea of using a sort finction that is known to produce wrong
results seemed more strange.
Does any other distro have something like this? How do linux
On Aug 18 22:06, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Comments? On perl code? You're kidding...
Well, maybe not from you personally, to save you the exasperation. :-)
Heh, yeah.
You know, if you're willing to improve the long neglected genini, all
power to you. I don't know
On Aug 18 20:34, Achim Gratz wrote:
Achim Gratz writes:
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
Here's a patch for genini that will take care of the versions in a
better way than before, and it's extensible (in genini) and configurable
(from setup.hint) if
Achim Gratz writes:
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
Here's a patch for genini that will take care of the versions in a
better way than before, and it's extensible (in genini) and configurable
(from setup.hint) if you're into that kind of thing. It's also
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Comments? On perl code? You're kidding...
Well, maybe not from you personally, to save you the exasperation. :-)
You know, if you're willing to improve the long neglected genini, all
power to you. I don't know how many people are actually using genini,
but I'm
On Jul 23 22:02, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Any string. I guess that works because the string prefix is fixed.
It's the name of the package.
True, it already knows that from setup.hint. But then it's still a
difference from how setup.exe handles things. Maybe I need to
Corinna Vinschen writes:
You've just described two persons. Who's the sond one? :-)
Haha. But... sond? I wasn't able to make out a word from that :}
Second. Somehow the two keypresses sisn't register.
Regards,
Achim.
--
+[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]+
Achim Gratz writes:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
You've just described two persons. Who's the sond one? :-)
Haha. But... sond? I wasn't able to make out a word from that :}
Second. Somehow the two keypresses sisn't register.
…didn't register. Either this keyboard needs replacement or my
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Yes. In the function itself prematch is generated from some regex if
it's not given as parameter. There are three places calling Normalize,
two of them with a 2nd parameter.
On closer inspection it seems there's already some provisioning for
different versioning
On Jul 23 21:37, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Yes. In the function itself prematch is generated from some regex if
it's not given as parameter. There are three places calling Normalize,
two of them with a 2nd parameter.
On closer inspection it seems there's already some
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Any string. I guess that works because the string prefix is fixed.
It's the name of the package.
True, it already knows that from setup.hint. But then it's still a
difference from how setup.exe handles things. Maybe I need to check
again because setup.exe could also
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Thanks, that confirms my suspicions. Could you tell me what Normalize
uses as the two inputs and how it returns the result?
I'm not really sure. It seems the input is a filename and something
optional called a prematch.
Is that optional paremeter ever used?
The
On Jul 23 19:08, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Thanks, that confirms my suspicions. Could you tell me what Normalize
uses as the two inputs and how it returns the result?
I'm not really sure. It seems the input is a filename and something
optional called a prematch.
On Jul 23 21:17, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jul 23 19:08, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Thanks, that confirms my suspicions. Could you tell me what Normalize
uses as the two inputs and how it returns the result?
I'm not really sure. It seems the input is a filename
On Jul 22 18:20, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
But then, for the time being, you can take care of this weird ordering
with prev and curr markers, right?
Yes, I could, but since I test things with genini locally I'll have to
guess when to to that.
Well, apart from me, no
Corinna Vinschen writes:
But then, for the time being, you can take care of this weird ordering
with prev and curr markers, right?
Yes, I could, but since I test things with genini locally I'll have to
guess when to to that.
Well, apart from me, no perl, me neither. Nevertheless I looked
On Jul 21 21:13, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
That's not sufficient, probably. I'm pretty sure you'd have to tweak
setup as well.
Maybe, but the order setup itself imposes really comes into play only if
the system has a version installed that is not in setup.ini anymore
Corinna Vinschen writes:
How do you tell upset that a package uses a different numbering
scheme? You'd have two scenarios which can't be recognized
automatically, don't you?
In the case of Perl distributions, I know the ordering scheme and it's
built in to upset already, sort-of, only has to
Corinna Vinschen writes:
That's not sufficient, probably. I'm pretty sure you'd have to tweak
setup as well.
Maybe, but the order setup itself imposes really comes into play only if
the system has a version installed that is not in setup.ini anymore and
that setup would order before all other
On Jul 21 18:59, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
How do you tell upset that a package uses a different numbering
scheme? You'd have two scenarios which can't be recognized
automatically, don't you?
In the case of Perl distributions, I know the ordering scheme and it's
On Jul 20 22:09, Achim Gratz wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Why? Version 1.10 is obviously 1.100 or 1.1000. How's this handled
in rpm?
Dunno about rpm. But for Perl, version numbers are handled a bit
differently and that extends to the versioning of distributions. Your
above
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
For perl-Carp, genini produces:
version: 1.36-1
[prev]
Jon TURNEY writes:
If I recall correctly, genini is just broken, doing some kind of
lexical sort which e.g. sorts 1.10 before 1.9.
Yes, it just globs the filenames, so the order is dependent on the
locale. But I can't tell what upset is doing, except that Yaakov fixed
something recently w.r.t.
On Jul 20 20:42, Achim Gratz wrote:
Jon TURNEY writes:
If I recall correctly, genini is just broken, doing some kind of
lexical sort which e.g. sorts 1.10 before 1.9.
Yes, it just globs the filenames, so the order is dependent on the
locale. But I can't tell what upset is doing, except
On 20/07/2015 19:03, Achim Gratz wrote:
I've just found that upset and genini will order versions differently.
For perl-Carp, genini produces:
version: 1.36-1
[prev]
version: 1.3301-2
while upset comes up with:
version: 1.3301-2
[prev]
version: 1.36-1
For the way Perl distributions are
Corinna Vinschen writes:
Why? Version 1.10 is obviously 1.100 or 1.1000. How's this handled
in rpm?
Dunno about rpm. But for Perl, version numbers are handled a bit
differently and that extends to the versioning of distributions. Your
above example is valid for numified version numbers,
54 matches
Mail list logo
