From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: How do package.el handles "duplicate packages"? Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:11 -0500 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26422"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Eduardo Ochs Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 25 07:13:55 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oyRyE-0006jP-Qc for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 07:13:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oyRxg-0004Ic-Vf; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oyRxe-0004IK-Fh for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oyRxc-0001ee-KM for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:17 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 472641000D8; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:14 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0226410011D; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:13 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1669356793; bh=PaWcsctOLW1FvEmxb6TyezGD7ZH3QXubnXIhCpNU+QU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=nmQTmVofIPJSXof6qNOCAU88QBloVrDdg9AbR0lDQCzDdH7+molo8AiUsWGXtPxsX zuDc7pqRm3aEXQnPyhIY6K03BzjX5TwGXRfbFwMhL/GO8F2ZF8Yty71PZdwt7XLciY n9GQYBDhOXIR0F9JxixIV6csCD9+gnUcPYPsHnammlrjXaPoG+GT6OCpscpwUvYQxk 771RUqDht0YV7pVmCaNJu4lNgHvr5nyhQ0DlF7EWzSPtiiEgruvgWQfYZz3tlt6BQn j69VzbUgGVITOFUKVnOI6+nHqOhvzHOfIoN0WYme5OlPghzxPnTH0p6G7mIAzZ41uq 2MUURG/GgwGmg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [104.247.241.157]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 262AF120E7A; Fri, 25 Nov 2022 01:13:11 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Eduardo Ochs's message of "Fri, 25 Nov 2022 00:58:39 -0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:141155 Archived-At: > Note that the current docstring doesn't mention that one of the entries > is for nongnu and the other one is for melpa: That's because the contents depends on the archives you have activated and which one of those archives offers the specific package. It could also be the case that an archive offers several versions of the same package (tho this case hasn't been tested, AFAIK). > Next question: is there a way to determine which of the entries - > nongnu or melpa - corresponds to a version that is more recent? The official way is to compare the versions with `version<=`, but since Melpa uses an incompatible versioning scheme, this will often not give you the answer you're looking for when comparing Melpa and (Non)GNU ELPA versions :-( That's a longstanding problem with Melpa versions (which does not affect Melpa-stable), but one that's not easy to fix without introducing regressions for existing Melpa users :-( Stefan