We had this interesting set of facts conundrum, according to vercmp
return values:
2.0a < 2.0
2.0 < 2.0.a
2.0a == 2.0.a
This introduces a code change that ensures '2.0a < 2.0.a' as would be
expected by the first two comparisons. Unfortunately this stays us a bit
further from upstream RPM code, but those are the breaks (in RPM, the
versions involving 'a' do in fact compare the same, but they are both
greater than the bare '2.0').
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
Note that this is meant to exercise pacsort more than the underlying
version comparsion; that is better left to the standalone vercmptest.sh
test script.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
The vercmptest script needs to be invoked as a bash script for this to
be valid; the -p operator is interpreted as an argument to look up by
sh. This goes way back to commit 3bf9448943, done to solve
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2008-July/007180.html.
Saw this problem running in a virtual machine where sh is not bash, but
in fact dash:
user@debian-powerpc:~/projects/pacman$ ./test/util/vercmptest.sh
src/util/vercmp-p: not found
src/util/vercmp is src/util/vercmp
vercmp binary (src/util/vercmp) could not be located
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
Adapting from RPM, follow the [epoch:]version[-release] syntax. We can also
borrow some of their parsing code for our purposes (thanks!). Add some new
tests to our vercmp shell script tester for epoch comparisons, and then make
the code work with these newfangled epoch specifiers.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
Now that not everything is in 'pactest/', we can separate out the parts a
bit more and leave the pacman/ directory to be just pactest.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org>
