On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:52 PM, James Vega <james...@debian.org> wrote: > 2010/9/21 Martin-Éric Racine <q-f...@iki.fi>: >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:33 PM, James Vega <james...@debian.org> wrote: >>> 2010/9/21 Martin-Éric Racine <q-f...@iki.fi>: >>>> $ uscan --verbose --rename >>>> - -- Scanning for watchfiles in . >>>> - -- Found watchfile in ./debian >>>> - -- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line: >>>> http://sf.net/openoffice-lv/lv_LV(.*)\.zip debian uupdate >>>> [...] >>>> Newest version on remote site is -0.9.3, local version is 0.9.1 >>>> => remote site does not even have current version >>> >>> $ dpkg --compare-versions -- '-0.9.3' gt '0.9.1' || echo "no" >>> no >>> >>> The version regex in your watch file is capturing too much (the leading >>> '-'). Changing "http://sf.net/openoffice-lv/lv_LV(.*)\.zip" to >>> "http://sf.net/openoffice-lv/lv_LV-+([0-9.]+)\.zip" will fix it. Adjust >>> accordingly if you also want to match versions like 0.5.rc2. >> >> Why was the current recipe working fine until now, then? This is the >> very first time that it barfs. Something must have changed in the way >> uupdate or uscan work since we pushed 0.9.1. >> > > Actually, your watch file changed. In 0.9.1, you were using > "http://sf.net/openoffice-lv/lv_LV-(.*)\.zip" so the '-' was counted as > part of the version string.
This only failed now, too. It reported 0.6.5 as the newest version. Martin-Éric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
