[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: versions numbers of tin & lynx (was Re: Recent upgrading notes.)

Craig Sanders writes ("versions numbers of tin & lynx (was Re: Recent upgrading notes.)"):
> On Sun, 5 May 1996, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > Dpkg thinks the new version of ae is a downgrade (493 to 96) but installs
> > it anyway. Will dselect do the right thing?
> Yeah, I caught this one too...luckily I was watching the screen while
> dselect was doing it's work.  dselect won't do it right, I had to force
> the upgrade with dpkg -i. 
> Other packages which have a similar problem are tin & lynx.

The next version of dpkg will have a new mechanism to cope with this.

> dselect thinks that tin-1.30b-4.deb (from contrib) is newer than
> tin-1.3beta.950824-11.deb (from unstable)
> dselect also thinks that lynx-2.4.2-1.deb (from stable) is newer than
> lynx-2.4-FM-960316-1.deb (from unstable).
> Is this a bug in dselect?  Is the version string comparison too simple?  I
> don't know if it's even possibe to write something which could do an
> accurate compare on such arbitrary version strings....


> All this just highlights the need for consistency in version numbers for
> new releases of the same package. 



Reply to: