Hi, >>"Gregory" == Gregory S Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gregory> Here's another reason using the epoch for this situation is Gregory> bad, if you continue the process you get something like: Gregory> 2.0.6 Gregory> 2.0.7pre1 Gregory> 1:2.0.7 Gregory> 1:2.0.8pre1 Gregory> 2:2.0.8 Gregory> 2:2.0.9pre1 Gregory> 3:2.0.10 Gregory> 3:2.0.10pre1 Gregory> 4:2.0.11 Gregory> ... Gregory> Essentially you are completely overriding the version number Gregory> with a hidden version number that the user isn't presented Gregory> with. Yes. But in this case, humans already know that 2.0.9pre1 is lower than 2.0.10; so the epochs merely make this clear to dpkg as well. epochs can be misused to create a bogus ordering, but in this case I think this is the system working as designed. Gregory> If we want to go this route we could just abandon Gregory> sorting on upstream package version and number our releases Gregory> sequentially. That may not be an unreasonable way to go, but Gregory> it certainly isn't the system we're using now. Oh, simmer down. This method makes sure that human readable upstream version numbers are also understood by dpkg. We are not just subverting the ordering; we are ensuring that upstream version sort correctly for Debian. manoj -- "The time for action is past! Now is the time for senseless bickering!" Ashleigh Brilliant Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/> Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]