On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 04:51:20PM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote: > > No, it shouldn't. Consider, eg, treating 2.2.9 and 2.2.10 as "2, 0.2, > > 0.9" and "2, 0.2, 0.10". > > > Yes, i am obviously wrong, trying to compare 0.9 and 0.10 is incorrect, as > is treating 0.1 as equal to 0.01 Should it have been 2.2.09 then? What do we do when we reach 2.2.99 and have need of a 2.2.100? It happened with 2.3.x didn't it? There is a reason things are done as they are, even if it seems to not be obvious at first. Frankly, some standard was needed, and the one that was chosen was the one which seemed to make the most sense to the people who were doing the work at the time. They chose to read . as a delimiter rather than a decimal because that is how it is most commonly used in version numbers, There are much more annoying things about how dpkg handles versions to argue about and IMO the effort would be better spent solving those problems - for example dpkg still lacks a method to identify a pre-version. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@bluecherry.net> Do not write in this space 0 7 * * * echo "...Linux is just a fad" | mail billg@microsoft.com -s "And remember..."
Attachment:
pgpR0IPN8jPjP.pgp
Description: PGP signature