From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from omta001.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net (omta001.cacentral1.a.cloudfilter.net [3.97.99.32]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A9C03858D29 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:08:20 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 5A9C03858D29 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=SystematicSw.ab.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=systematicsw.ab.ca Received: from shw-obgw-4003a.ext.cloudfilter.net ([10.228.9.183]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id TS5fmbyTlczbLTSCqmMLfs; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:08:20 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.105] ([68.147.0.90]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id TSCpmx6sScHSBTSCpmTpOW; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:08:19 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=I4EG+Psg c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=614cb484 a=T+ovY1NZ+FAi/xYICV7Bgg==:117 a=T+ovY1NZ+FAi/xYICV7Bgg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=vTr9H3xdAAAA:8 a=w_pzkKWiAAAA:8 a=uYT-Tk0qkVT609LjNaIA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=DyKocZ4c4pQA:10 a=7PCjnrUJ-F5voXmZD6jJ:22 a=sRI3_1zDfAgwuvI8zelB:22 Reply-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com References: <87ee9j92m0.fsf@Otto.invalid> <6afad1d6-d3ea-7903-151e-e50f6a9a98ab@SystematicSw.ab.ca> <5212e253-7778-f034-d1a9-c4acf0feac40@cornell.edu> <04aa78a5-c925-b04f-52aa-69111b919444@Shaw.ca> <67547c41-55c4-743a-1194-3d47bb5562cd@cornell.edu> <33d08934-9b57-e7be-307f-ec6393c8f124@cornell.edu> <3ab0a2a5-fae8-44b4-3f6e-de29d4a12ecf@SystematicSw.ab.ca> <822cc7dd-fa50-e379-25b9-406f4368c6e7@dronecode.org.uk> From: Brian Inglis Organization: Systematic Software Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: dash 0.5.11.5 Message-ID: <2af97eee-5f34-00f1-aa96-6f5e647d7020@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 11:08:19 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <822cc7dd-fa50-e379-25b9-406f4368c6e7@dronecode.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfHiTZGt/mup4UKFJbmj8x2WETTTHwPL69DfPBmr2Y1vqYno6PIG6Zq10MplfxV48hkM1qaHkcR64ny9Jp51ELO/4tsZp1l1igqi1u4wCOZe+1UMCUYA+ oRydTg5UNHQX8cDZZFvYnay79rjhMCkm7PYw4JQhOFdbo0zx8KwzPWIHPFxUExMnQ9ZG/afQVlrQSr5hBjC5+k6pffAdfMcOiHU= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1160.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Cygwin package maintainer discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 17:08:21 -0000 On 2021-09-23 07:36, Jon Turney wrote: > On 22/09/2021 04:30, Brian Inglis wrote: >> On 2021-09-21 14:04, Jon Turney wrote: >>> Release numbers starting with 0 already have a defined meaning. >>> They are to be used for upstream pre-release versions >>> e.g pkg-1.0-0.1.g12345678 is a pre-release of pkg 1.0, since this >>> sorts before pkg-1.0-1 >>> See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Versioning_Examples, >>> included by reference in >>> https://cygwin.com/packaging-package-files.html, for some more examples. >> Thanks for that pointer and link, but the examples are simple with >> uniform version levels and random strings ordered using sequential >> prefixes. >> The upstream bison test versions I was trying while working on some >> test config problems with bison 3.8/3.8.1 e.g. >> bison-3.8.1.27-dd6e.tar.xz, bison-3.8.1.29-5c106.tar.xz should they be >> 3.8.1.27-0.1.dd6e, 3.8.1.29-0.1.5c106 or >> 3.8.1-0.27.dd6e, 3.8.1-0.29.5c106 or even >> 3.8.1-0.1.27.dd6e, 3.8.1-0.2.29.5c106 ? > Question is a little unclear, but I think the answer is you are looking > for is that R should be something like '0..' Thanks Jon, Sorry I meant to address VERSION and RELEASE, which means none of my alternatives are usable, but my first set of alternatives would work, with the second test release's serial bumped. >> For these multi-level versions, is ls -v or sort -V definitive for >> Cygwin versions, or some other sort? > https://cygwin.com/packaging-package-files.html also describes the > ordering. >>  Version and release sort according to the following rules: >> >> Contiguous chunks of digits or alphabetic characters are compared >> Non-alphanumeric separators for these contiguous chunks are ignored >> Alphabetic chunks sort before digit chunks >> Digit chunks sort numerically and alphabetic chunks sort >> lexicographically >> If all chunks are equal, the string with any suffix remaining is >> the greater I looked at the calm, setup, ls, and sort code, and they appear similar, but I missed the subtlety of alpha before numeric. The first rule also implies that mixed symbol sets like hashes, hex, or encodings generate multiple not usefully comparable chunks. >> A package with a higher version is greater, regardless of the release. >> When two packages have an identical version, the one with the higher >> release is greater. The Cygwin code also supports a leading /epoch:/ default 0 like Debian. > This is the ordering known as 'rpmvercmp'. I noticed the mention of rpmvercmp, but it appeared non-definitive. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada This email may be disturbing to some readers as it contains too much technical detail. Reader discretion is advised. [Data in binary units and prefixes, physical quantities in SI.]