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

Re: version numbers



On Tue, May 11, 1999 at 11:10:26PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> James Mastros writes:
> > Package it as version 1:1.1; next time package as 1:2.0.2, which will
> > give the ordering you're looking for.  (The 1: is an "era"; it won't
> > normaly get displayed.  Made for just this sort of thing.)
>
> It's an "epoch", I believe.  I know about epochs, but I've never seen
> anyone suggest using them without meeting with cries of outrage.  Thus I
> would like to avoid them if at all possible.
>
> I am also just a bit astonished by the notion that 1.1 < 1.02.

Numerically this is the same as saying 1.1 < 1.2 or 1.01 < 1.02. Dpkg
is checking numerically, as it should.

Just think about that 1 = 01 = 001 = 0001 ....

--
-----    -- - -------- --------- ----  -------  -----  - - ---   --------
Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>                        Debian GNU/Linux
OpenLDAP Dev - bcollins@openldap.org     The Choice of the GNU Generation
------ -- ----- - - -------   ------- -- ---- - -------- - --- ---- -  --


Reply to: