Re: binary NMUs and version numbers
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
1.rc << 1.rc2 << 1.rc+b1
1.2-1~beta << 1.2-1~beta2 << 1.2-1~beta+b1
1.2~beta-1 << 1.2~beta-1+b1 << 1.2~beta2-1
Keeping the Debian revision simple is a Good Thing.
Adding the implicit '0' that dpkg assumes on versions ending in alpha
chars would solve both cases:
That'd mean REJECTing uploads whose versions match "[^0-9]+[a-z][0-9]+$"
Another case that should be considered is the existing use of + for
revisions of a cvs snapshot (e.g. mutt uses a + but always does so):
1.2-20041208 "<<" 1.2-20041208+2 "<<" 1.2-20041208+b1
Hrm, why isn't this 1.2+20041208-1 ? Isn't the date describing the
upstream version? Or "1.2-20041208-1", or "1.2+cvs20041208-1" or whatever.
-rw-rw-r-- 16 katie debadmin 2908273 May 2 2004
-rw-rw-r-- 16 katie debadmin 412082 Nov 17 10:17
It seems to result in rather large diffs, and I can't really see the
There are 3 simple solutions to this:
1. forbid + in debian versions and think of another character instead
doing the same (must be < '.')
Actually, that doesn't work either -- otherwise a new maintainer version
(x-y#1) compares less than an old NMU (x-y.1). For the same reason "= ."