*To*: debian-devel@lists.debian.org*Cc*: "Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net>*Subject*: Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]*From*: Matthew Palmer <mpalmer@debian.org>*Date*: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:42:53 +1000*Message-id*: <[🔎] 20060811004253.GD26527@hezmatt.org>*Mail-followup-to*: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, "Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net>*In-reply-to*: <[🔎] 20060810234736.GG17235@miami.connexer.com>*References*: <20060808235835.GA19278@lapse.madduck.net> <[🔎] 87mzae1a7d.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <[🔎] 44DBBD7B.8020909@teco.edu> <[🔎] 20060810232940.GA6592@chistera.yi.org> <[🔎] 20060810234736.GG17235@miami.connexer.com>

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:47:36PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 01:29:40AM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote: > > * Michael Biebl [Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:12:59 +0200]: > > > > > that "dpkg --compare-versions '0.09' '=' '0.9'" yields true, which I > > > think is rather odd, because it means that now all version numbers up to > > > 0.9 will be considered < 0.09+0.1. > > > > 0.09 = 0.9 means: > > > > 0 == 0 > > and > > . == . > > and > > 09 == 9 > > > > Which is pretty standard math. ;-) > > > Except that the final comparison ignores that the number was to the > right of the decimal, making the zero significant. I think you will be > hard pressed to find a mathematician who supports dropping significant > zeros for no good reason. I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software developers, not mathematicians. Or, to put it another way: your numbers are not our numbers. <grin> - Matt

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]***From:*"Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net>

**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]***From:*Lionel Elie Mamane <lionel@mamane.lu>

**References**:**Re: dak now supports ~ in version numbers***From:*Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>

**dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]***From:*Michael Biebl <biebl@teco.edu>

**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]***From:*Adeodato Simó <dato@net.com.org.es>

**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]***From:*"Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]** - Next by Date:
**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]** - Previous by thread:
**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?-** - Next by thread:
**Re: dpkg doing wrong math (0.09 = 0.9) ?- [was: dak now supports ~ in version numbers]** - Index(es):