[gentoo-dev] The eight digit limit

[gentoo-dev] The eight digit limit

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 770 bytes --]

PMS currently has the following:

> The package manager must not impose fixed limits upon the number of
> version components. No integer part of a version specification may
> contain more than eight digits. Package managers should indicate or
> reject any version that is invalid according to these rules.

Historically, Portage had weird bugs for excessively long version
parts, especially when leading zeroes were involved, although as far as
I'm aware it's clean with arbitrary lengths now. Paludis is clean (and
issues a QA notice for violations), but portage-utils fails the
whole version handling thing in an epic fashion.

Given this, do we still need that restriction in place? There're quite
a few violations in the tree.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] The eight digit limit

[Luca Barbato]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> PMS currently has the following:
> 
>> The package manager must not impose fixed limits upon the number of
>> version components. No integer part of a version specification may
>> contain more than eight digits. Package managers should indicate or
>> reject any version that is invalid according to these rules.
> 
> Historically, Portage had weird bugs for excessively long version
> parts, especially when leading zeroes were involved, although as far as
> I'm aware it's clean with arbitrary lengths now. Paludis is clean (and
> issues a QA notice for violations), but portage-utils fails the
> whole version handling thing in an epic fashion.

could you please fill a bug about portage-utils on our bugzilla?

> Given this, do we still need that restriction in place? There're quite
> a few violations in the tree.

I think the issue could be addressed and the limitation relaxed.

lu

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] The eight digit limit

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 304 bytes --]

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:06:12 +0100
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> could you please fill a bug about portage-utils on our bugzilla?

The portage-utils people have claimed that they're not interested in
fixing bugs until PMS is approved. See 210386 for example...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]