Dne neděle 08 Listopad 2009 17:57:10 Jeroen Roovers napsal(a):
> On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 18:24:10 +0100
> 
> Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > * Masking beta...
> > This masks are good if the software release is KNOWN to break
> > previous behaviour or degrade user experience. Otherwise the software
> > should not be masked (its TESTING for purpose, not stable).
> > Also the maintainer should watch if the testing branch is still
> > relevant (why on earth we have masked 4.0.3_p20070403 version of
> > screen when newer 4.3 is stable ;]) and remove the branch+mask when
> > needed.
> 
> I agree with your criticism (i.e. that the mask should not be there,
> especially not for "testing" as what the mask does is *prevent* testing
> instead of enabling it), but must note that your version sorting
> algorithm appears to be flawed: pkg-vX_pY (for patch level) is always
> greater than pkg-vX.
> 
> 
> Regards,
>      jer
> 
I agree that _p is newer than that.
But if we look on tag of screen-4.0.3 or its release:
 screen-4.0.2.tar.gz        27-Jan-2004 05:46  821K  
 screen-4.0.2.tar.gz.sig    27-Jan-2004 05:47   65   
 screen-4.0.3.tar.gz        07-Aug-2008 06:30  821K  
 screen-4.0.3.tar.gz.sig    07-Aug-2008 06:30   65   
You see the pattern? It is 1 year newer than it.

Tomas