On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 10:06:48 -0800
Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Conrad J. Sabatier
> wrote:
> > Can anyone explain why I'm seeing the following?
> >
> > libX11-1.4.99.1 < needs updating (index has
> > 1.4.4,1)
> >
> > How is it that version 1.4.99
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
> Can anyone explain why I'm seeing the following?
>
> libX11-1.4.99.1 < needs updating (index has
> 1.4.4,1)
>
> How is it that version 1.4.99.1 compares as "less than" 1.4.4,1?
> Since when is 99 < 4?
>
> Is it the
On 12/18/2011 17:43, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
Can anyone explain why I'm seeing the following?
libX11-1.4.99.1
Can anyone explain why I'm seeing the following?
libX11-1.4.99.1 < needs updating (index has
1.4.4,1)
How is it that version 1.4.99.1 compares as "less than" 1.4.4,1?
Since when is 99 < 4?
Is it the PORTEPOCH in 1.4.4,1 that's throwing a monkey wrench into the
works?
This