On 01/11/10 20:32, Keith Marshall wrote:
>> Looking at mingw32-mingw-get.xml I see:
>>
>> <component class="bin">
>> <release tarname="mingw-get-0.1-mingw32-alpha-3-bin.tar.gz" />
>> <release tarname="mingw-get-0.1-mingw32-alpha-4-bin.tar.gz" />
>> <release tarname="mingw-get-0.1-mingw32-alpha-5-bin.tar.gz" />
>> </component>
>>
>> It seems that it's automatically picking the first release listed
>> (alpha-3) versus determine the most update release (alpha-5).
>
> Seems that I didn't test it as rigorously as I thought :( The bug would
> appear to be that a proper comparison of the release status fields isn't
> being performed, to determine that alpha-5 is newer than alpha-3.
Yep. That was the problem; only the package version fields were being
compared, completely ignoring the development status and subsystem
version fields.
>> Should the list be reversed, or should mingw-get be able to determine
>> that it should be picking the later release?
>
> It should determine the correct chronology, regardless of the order in
> which those release records appear. Reversing the list order does seem
> to successfully work around the issue, so I've posted an updated XML
> manifest on that basis; however, this is no more than a temporary work
> around, so I'll still need to investigate and fix it properly.
We never had a formal ticket for this, but it should be fixed from
mingw-get-0.2-alpha-1 onwards. The version comparator now considers
the package version fields first; if they compare as equal, it then
considers progression in the development status fields, and finally,
if they too compare as equal, it will consider the subsystem version
fields. Only if all of the preceding are equal, will it now report
equality.
--
Regards,
Keith.
|
