Re: Summary[2]: dpkg and alpha/beta versioning
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> writes:
> How does everyone else feel about the '~ compares less than everything`
> idea? It seems like it could solve a few other problems - for instance
> what do the bo-updates people do when they recompile dpkg? They don't have
> the luxury of being able to change the hamm release number.
Fine with me. It avoids the source package name problem, and it's
really no uglier than any other proposal.
For now (in libgc4), I'm using the oldversion-newversion-pre1-*
scheme, but I'd rather do what you're proposing. How many places will
we have to change sorting algorithms, though?
dpkg
dpkg-dev?
apt
dftp?
dinstall?
We should probably compile a list and go through it. Actually what we
should *really* do is provide
int debian_compare_revisions(const char *a, const char *b);
in a shared lib (or the base system), and then mandate that everyone
use that. After that changes like this will be painless for
everything except perhaps dftp (which is designed to run on non-debian
systems).
Given the shared lib, it would also be trivial to support access from
dpkg-perl, python, guile, whatever...
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: