On 11/22/2016 02:53 AM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote:
(SNIP)
> What is the best solution to deal with this? I think I can either map the
> scheme to a more reasonable one (e.g. "8.5.pl3" instead of "8.5pl3"), or
> bump the epoch when needed.
>
what i'd recommend is instead use 8.5 -> 8.5.1 -> 8.5.2
Hi,
I maintain a package in the AUR [1], coq [2], whose upstream versioning
scheme is a bit strange.
Basically, they release versions in the following order:
8.4 → 8.4pl1 → 8.4pl2 → 8.5 → 8.5pl1 → etc
This breaks pacman's comparison function. For instance, with a local
repo, pacman does
=== Signoff report for [community-testing] ===
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/
There are currently:
* 2 new packages in last 24 hours
* 0 known bad packages
* 0 packages not accepting signoffs
* 2 fully signed off packages
* 25 packages missing signoffs
* 0 packages older than 14
