Hi,
On 01/28/2012 08:03 PM, Alessio Treglia wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Joachim Reichel <joachim.reic...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>> to one of my binary packages I want to add a dependency like
>> Depends: foo (>= ${source:Upstream-Version}), foo (<<
>> ${source:Next-Upstream-Version})
>
> I usually rely on:
>
> package (<< ${source:Upstream-Version}+1~),
> package (>= ${source:Version}),
after sending the mail I was thinking about
package (<< ${source:Upstream-Version}.1)
But + is better than . because it sorts before . (actually + is the
lexicographically smallest character allowed in upstream versions, see
policy 5.6.12).
I wonder about the "1~" though. Isn't
package (<< ${source:Upstream-Version}+)
sufficient (and tighter)? (though it looks a bit weird)
(It's not sufficient if upstream adds a "~", but that's probably
unlikely, and I don't see a way to handle that case.)
Joachim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f245062.2060...@gmx.de
