vercmp behavior changed on "1.5b versus 1.5" compare
 

Miklos Vajna wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 10:53:16AM -0500, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Either way, I'm not convinced there is a right answer to what is
>> greater and lesser, but it does warrent looking into as the behavior
>> changed. I did see some comments in the new code alluding to some
>> upstream changes that may have been related to version numbers similar
>> to this.
>
> here is what upstream usually does:
>
> 1.0pre1< 1.0rc1< 1.0< 1.0a
>

what about beta or b?

> if the package manager doesn't know anything about what 'a', 'pre' or
> 'rc' means, you can't handle all the situations.
>
> pacman (before the recent change, i haven't bisected it) handled pre/rc
> properly and package maintainers had to do hacks for 1.0a-like releases
> (samba, etc).
>

The recent changes are here :
http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commit;h=84283672853350a84d2a71b72 dc06e180cad1587
http://projects.archlinux.org/?p=pacman.git;a=commitdiff;h=54e1e3e642d834d8c676d b7f74e95c6e24b19eab

Currently, there is no special handling so it seems we just have an
alphabetical order, that is :
1.0 < 1.0a < 1.0alpha < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0p < 1.0pre < 1.0rc

I am not sure how it was before though, maybe the only difference was
that 1.0 was last instead of first?

_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

vercmp behavior changed on "1.5b versus 1.5" compare
 

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 10:34:34AM +0200, Xavier <shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
> > here is what upstream usually does:
> >
> > 1.0pre1< 1.0rc1< 1.0< 1.0a
> >
>
> what about beta or b?

usually a project uses the alpha/beta _or_ the rc/pre schema, not both.
but yes, this is just one more example about _if_ we want to make the
current (read: before the recent changes) better, then the package
manager needs to know about these releases.

> Currently, there is no special handling so it seems we just have an
> alphabetical order, that is :
> 1.0 < 1.0a < 1.0alpha < 1.0b < 1.0beta < 1.0p < 1.0pre < 1.0rc
>
> I am not sure how it was before though, maybe the only difference was
> that 1.0 was last instead of first?

it was how i described in my previous mail, so:

1.0rc < 1.0 -> good
1.0pre < 1.0 -> good
1.0alpha < 1.0 -> good
1.0beta < 1.0 -> good
1.0a < 1.0 -> bad
1.0b < 1.0 -> bad
1.0b (if 'a' stands for alpha) < 1.0 -> good
1.0b (if 'b' stands for beta) < 1.0 -> good

so it was 6 good vs 2 bad while now it's 6 bad vs 2 good, if i haven't
miscounted something.
_______________________________________________
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev