unofficial mirror of bug-guix@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Chris Marusich <cmmarusich@gmail.com>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Cc: 28446@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#28446: linux-libre@4.1 should select 4.1.x, not 4.13.x
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:53:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a81njy6h.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ingc2p51.fsf@elephly.net> (Ricardo Wurmus's message of "Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:48:58 +0200")

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1321 bytes --]

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> writes:

> Hi Mark,
>
>> Currently, the package specification "linux-libre@4.1" selects version
>> 4.13.  It should instead select version 4.1.
>
> We consider everthing following the “@” a version string prefix.  Since
> versions are arbitrary strings “4.1” is considered a valid prefix of
> “4.13”.  If a user supplied the version string “4.1.” they would get the
> appropriate package.
>
> The current implementation sorts all matches in decreasing version order
> and picks the package with the highest version.  This is implemented in
> (gnu packages) with “%find-packages”, “find-best-packages-by-name”, and
> “find-packages-by-name”.
>
> Should we try to make the code understand version strings better and
> compare substrings of the version string?  We could fall back to using
> “string-prefix?” when the substring is not a number.
>

Why not require an exact match?  If someone asks for 4.1, they shouldn't
get 4.11 or 4.13 or anything else; they should get 4.1.  In my
experience, mechanisms that attempt to guess which package version the
user meant generally wind up choosing the wrong thing at some point.  I
think it would be reasonable to bail out and ask the user to clarify
what they wanted.

-- 
Chris

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-22  1:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-13 15:07 bug#28446: linux-libre@4.1 should select 4.1.x, not 4.13.x Mark H Weaver
2017-09-21 12:48 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2017-09-22  1:53   ` Chris Marusich [this message]
2017-09-22  8:04     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2017-09-26  4:26   ` Mark H Weaver
2018-05-13 11:31     ` Ludovic Courtès

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://guix.gnu.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87a81njy6h.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=cmmarusich@gmail.com \
    --cc=28446@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=rekado@elephly.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).