This one time, at band camp, Roger Leigh said: > Ben Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > >> On Tue, January 3, 2006 09:47, Gregor Richards wrote: > >> > I updated the package to 1.0.0. The version compare algorithm doesn't > >> > like it ... it thinks that 1.0.0 is less than 1.0.0rc5 ... but that's not > >> > how release candidates work :) > >> > >> That's indeed a caveat on the Debian version compare algorithm. When > >> you're packaging a release candidate, you normally should watch out for > >> adding 'rcN' to the version to avoid being able to update it to the real > >> version later. > >> > >> What's done commonly is something like this: 0.9.9+1.0.0rc5, or for a > >> higher version: 2.4.3+2.4.4rc1. > > > > I believe this practice has been obsolete since the release of sarge. > > dpkg now considers "~" to sort before anything, even a null string, so > > you can use e.g. "1.0.0~rc5". > > The last time I checked, the archive infrastructure couldn't cope with > this, so while you could build and install, you couldn't upload > packages with a '~' in the version. > > It may be the situation has now changed; hopefully someone might be > able to clarify that.
As of, er, last I heard (a month or two ago? I can't remember more precisely), you are correct. It is essentially a small patch to DAK to make this work, but it has not (or perhaps had not) yet been applied. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
