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

Re: Dash and dot in package version

Ludovico Cavedon wrote:

> Hi,
> I could not find exactly how "-" and "." are ordered in package names.
> Are they equivalent, counting as non-digits?
> My actual problem is:
> -current version of qutecom is "2.2~rc3.dfsg1"
> -as per lintian warning, the next version will be "+dfsg1" instead of
> ".dfsg1"
> -latest upstream version is still 2.2~rc3, but I would like to upload a
> more recent snapshot from upstream hg. What would be the correct
> packager version?
> - "2.2~rc3+hg365+dfsg1", being lucky that "+hg" comes after "+dfsg"
> - "2.2~rc3-hg365+dfsg1", but would have the "-" any drawback I do not see?

When adding a dfsg or whatever suffix, always use ~ to avoid problems like 
the one Jan pointed out. So your version would be 2.2~rc3~dfsg1, and then 
you bump to 2.2~rc3+hg123~dfsg1.

I think you should use 2.2~rc3.hg123~dfsg1 for now, and when 2.2 is released 
you go to 2.2.0~dfsg1 (the .0 is needed because dfsg sorts before rc3).

Felipe Sateler

Reply to: