Bug#2059: dpkg and depend on versions
Erick Branderhorst writes ("Re: Bug#2059: dpkg and depend on versions"):
> Yes, I'm sure, the transcription was in chronological order. I didn't understand
> the `5' either.
Chronological order ?
> I was thinking that perhaps the < was causing it?
> Is the conflicting version number calculated from (<2.3.10-6) or is it
> displayed right away after reading it from the status file. I should have
> send the status file probably but I think it is too late now.
The conflicting version number isn't *calculated* at all, it just
comes out of dpkg's idea of what's in the status file ...
If you can't reproduce this I suppose I'll have to close the report.