On 11/04/2014 at 12:12 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt writes ("Re: Punctuation characters in Debian
> packaging"):
>
>> No. I don't think package names should be forbidden just because
>> APT treats them in a special way. Otherwise you would have to
>> forbid "+" and "." anywhere in package names as well as trailing
>> "-" as apt treats all of those in a special way:
>>
>> apt-get -s remove b.sh apt-get -s remove ba+sh
>
> WTF. So if you actually want apt-get to work reliably you have to
> quote everything ? Surely that's a rather alarming misfeature.
>
> I had a look through archive.debian.org and there are _lots_ of
> packages whose names end in `+' (typically, `++'), many of which
> exist in sid.
That's why I didn't propose forbidding package names which end in - or +.
What I did propose is forbidding adding a (binary) package whose name is
the result of either appending + or - to an existing package name, or
removing a trailing + or - from an existing package name.
> apt-get seems to prefer actual package names to ones resulting from
> stripping `+' (which is also IMO a bug).
Can you explain why this would be considered a bug? It seems to produce
the desired behavior in every case I've been able to think of so far.
> I haven't (yet) found any package names ending in `-' but I wouldn't
> be surprised to find some.
There aren't any in current stable, testing, stable/updates, or
testing/updates, at least. That was the first thing I checked.
--
The Wanderer
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature