On Saturday, August 13, 2011 14:37:46 Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-08-13 12:51, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > #2 and #3 don't really make sense between OSes, and I'd argue that they > > don't make much sense period. I don't know what they'd mean on Windows > > in any meaningful way. On Linux, I suppose that they could be the major > > and minor numbers of the kernel (e.g. 2 and 6 or 3 and 0), but that's > > pretty useless on Linux, given that they don't change very often. At > > this point, there would only really be two options: 2.6 and 3.0. And I > > don't know how major and minor could be applied to OS X or FreeBSD. > > In Mac OS X you have three version numbers, for example: 10.6.8. Or at > least two, don't know if I would call the first one a version number. I > mean, Mac OS 9 and Mac OS 10 is two completely different operating systems.
Well, since the OS is Mac OS X, not Mac OS (at least so far as versioning in D goes), then presumably 10.6.8 would have the major number 6 and the minor number 8. - Jonathan M Davis
