Florian Weimer writes:
> But until these versions are explicitly described as invalid, shouldn't
> the comparison algorithm cover them, so that different implementations
> behave in the same way?
Oh, definitely. And I believe the textual description does cover them;
there just aren't any exampl
* Russ Allbery:
> Samuel Henrique writes:
>
>> I suggest making it more explicit by adding an example to it and
>> explicitly writing the precedence of them, I did some tests with dpkg
>> --compare-versions to confirm and found out that that is (n being a
>> number):
>> "~ - n + ." eg.: 1.0~0-1
Samuel Henrique writes:
> I suggest making it more explicit by adding an example to it and
> explicitly writing the precedence of them, I did some tests with dpkg
> --compare-versions to confirm and found out that that is (n being a
> number):
> "~ - n + ." eg.: 1.0~0-1 < 1.0-0-1 < 1.0-1 < 1.0+0
Hello team,
I was writing this bugreport for repology today[0] and decided to re-read
something in d-policy that was never very clear to me.
I'm gonna try to be verbose to try to make myself more clear.
5.6.12. Version[1]
It talks about how the characters ". + - ~" are evaluated both for
upstrea
4 matches
Mail list logo
