Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I mostly agree, but the argument that anything to the right of the > dash should only reflect *Debian* related revisions does hold some > water.
The question is: is it being used to bail out a maintainer who didn't take other steps to deal with the version information or not? > 2.0.7-1:alpha > 2.0.7-1:pre1 > etc. > > So anything to the right of a : that's to the right of the - would be > the mini-epoch, and any package with a :foo at the end automatically > sorted as older than the same version of the package without the :X > (ignoring the debian revision). Er.. but this violates least surprise. You'd expect that the 1: to the left of alpha would have higher precedence than the :alpha. I'd prefer to see 2.0.7-alpha:1 2.0.7-pre:1 > Unfortunately this might require some major dpkg hackery akin to the > hassle we had introducing epochs in the first place, but it would IMO > be a "cleanish" solution to the problem. Yep, but (assuming we don't want to violate least surprise) we could use a subset of its functionality right now, with the existing sorting rules. -- Raul -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]