From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 65957 invoked by alias); 21 Jul 2015 06:56:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 65275 invoked by uid 89); 21 Jul 2015 06:55:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: calimero.vinschen.de Received: from aquarius.hirmke.de (HELO calimero.vinschen.de) (217.91.18.234) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 06:55:58 +0000 Received: by calimero.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id 948AEA80966; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 08:55:56 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 06:56:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: upset, genini: different version ordering Message-ID: <20150721065556.GY3864@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com References: <87380i671e.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <55AD399D.7020001@dronecode.org.uk> <87y4ia4qnp.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <20150720190010.GV3864@calimero.vinschen.de> <87twsy4mms.fsf@Rainer.invalid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1AtvaQRkIQxkm1Oe" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87twsy4mms.fsf@Rainer.invalid> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg00150.txt.bz2 --1AtvaQRkIQxkm1Oe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 690 On Jul 20 22:09, Achim Gratz wrote: > Corinna Vinschen writes: > > Why? Version 1.10 is obviously < 1.100 or 1.1000. How's this handled > > in rpm? >=20 > Dunno about rpm. But for Perl, version numbers are handled a bit > differently and that extends to the versioning of distributions. Your > above example is valid for "numified" version numbers, but not other > variants. How do you tell upset that a package uses a different numbering scheme? You'd have two scenarios which can't be recognized=20 automatically, don't you? Corinna --=20 Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat --1AtvaQRkIQxkm1Oe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-length: 819 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJVrez8AAoJEPU2Bp2uRE+gil8P/2J6791TZUbJRNx2/l0LCq+W MkFk/cipFryuwGMo0IgIxTr77vP0gjZQr1yPXudox5ELfdFalvgRODqSB2bXC3NO N0oQZ/5CyhnPd3y/EQwi5AlWvtf2ZCOaxbY4bca0Mqt7ZXO2XPjdZRnpcctPGKX1 nYsfBxDCFDxssR/712mdPoFdSfn5SHUztVHP+4gqYmqvC9bZR6jmSEQ3Ck6Fg0ve oEbo7NkZjz/RwwpPLmrijOOwzugItQte5s/vNPR7LF8hJ+7626BLcK+JJ1Szk5Ww m+RYl4FOgRSum3OsytPM/gxbkWaZshqARd75/fKOqZoNwkC2TTlpurDr5dRgwHmo 1ZZqhp2N6ddx+DyxkXK2zTbESpeawAGnCiiqXNVB3/YESXGkcrv1hqebbc2gh8YB 5yY91CXDM3KclOzZH3/5CdIJ/0K+HOsXPqiCgqEDJhkksrN1ZZKQ3X20xQ7ztOIH YtutfrkQEJ7GXRN1a5Rrdz9MRoHm6o6L+pQA/HVEfc0kEtBLQ7vAnW1CEHDv1M3X GwOacdXOso/uRkUVLxmeJUK0SSTgMVqkZSwSwAh7OLYALyE/Y0G5zQw2K+52MocX oGCFT6xe6Spoh+qsuj06wlB0gDDojllpwB7bpD7l4tjpGAHbnnHAEBDQEX1y6q0J YUSSqhsEsTXaMfImo/1r =Yexq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1AtvaQRkIQxkm1Oe--