You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org on 2014/10/26 17:46:53 UTC
[Bug 7095] New: Don't assume versions are numeric
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
Bug ID: 7095
Summary: Don't assume versions are numeric
Product: Spamassassin
Version: SVN Trunk (Latest Devel Version)
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: Libraries
Assignee: dev@spamassassin.apache.org
Reporter: jidanni@jidanni.org
warn: Argument "0.80_2" isn't numeric in numeric lt (<) at
Mail/SpamAssassin/Dns.pm line 521.
warn: Argument "0.80_2" isn't numeric in numeric ge (>=) at
Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/AskDNS.pm line 214.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7095] Don't assume versions are numeric
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
--- Comment #2 from jidanni@jidanni.org ---
Well all I can say is if you feel they are wrong, feel free to file a bug with
them.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7095] Don't assume versions are numeric
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
Karsten Bräckelmann <gu...@rudersport.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Karsten Bräckelmann <gu...@rudersport.de> ---
The Net::DNS project's site net-dns.org currently states the "current release
version of Net::DNS is: 0.80". Moreover, their blog post as of Oct 24 mentions
a release candidate for Net::DNS 0.81, linked to the 0.80_2 tarball.
Closing RESOLVED INVALID.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7095] Don't assume versions are numeric
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
--- Comment #4 from Karsten Bräckelmann <gu...@rudersport.de> ---
FWIW, despite some textual version confusion, CPAN still links to the latest
stable 0.80 source.
This issue is caused by Debian packaging a pre-release tarball on Oct 24,
whereas they exclusively packaged stable releases before. See
https://packages.qa.debian.org/libn/libnet-dns-perl.html
In particular note the 0.80.2-x releases and compare to all previous versions
not including a micro version number. libnet-dns-perl_0.80.2 actually contains
pre-release Net::DNS 0.80_2, an 0.80.2 version as the deb claims does not
exist.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7095] Don't assume versions are numeric
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
jidanni@jidanni.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
URL| |http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
| |bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=76671
| |8
CC| |jidanni@jidanni.org
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
[Bug 7095] Don't assume versions are numeric
Posted by bu...@bugzilla.spamassassin.org.
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7095
--- Comment #1 from Karsten Bräckelmann <gu...@rudersport.de> ---
It seems there are Net::DNS tarballs published accidentally, and the Net::DNS
authors actually consider them pre-release beta.
See http://perldoc.perl.org/perlmodstyle.html section Release Considerations,
Version Numbering:
"A correct CPAN version number is a floating point number with at least
2 digits after the decimal."
"If you want to release a 'beta' or 'alpha' version of a module but
don't want CPAN.pm to list it as most recent use an '_' after the
regular version number followed by at least 2 digits, eg. 1.20_01."
Even search.cpan.org gets confused by this, showing an inconsistent mix of 0.80
and 0.80_2 in URIs and text.
I believe this should be raises with the Net::DNS team instead. Looking at the
archive of their previous tarballs, they did follow the two digits rule before.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.