package version checks should allow ranges (Feature request)

[sshipway]

When specifying a required package version, it should be possible to use ranges (> or < ). This would allow a test for 'at least this version' (to avoid a known bug) or 'no later than this version' (to avoid incompatibilities). Ideally, the syntax could also allow 'or not installed' as an extension to this.

May be related to #355

[aelsabbahy]

It's somewhat related to #355, semver is a check I would like to add as an advanced macher

However, each package manager uses its own way to compare versions, so that may or may not be helpful depending on the package manager and it's comparison rules.

For example RPM uses the following logic to compare versions:
https://blog.jasonantman.com/2014/07/how-yum-and-rpm-compare-versions/

[thatsk]

for Rpm based:-
you should be do
cmd := util.NewCommand("rpm", "-q", "--nosignature", "--nohdrchk", "--nodigest", "--qf", "%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n", p.name)

[pedroMMM]

@aelsabbahy #508 should take care of this.

Simple check x > 4.0.0:

package:
  kernel:
    installed: true
    versions:
      version-gt: "4.0.0"

Range check 5.0.0 < x > 4.0.0:

package:
  kernel:
    installed: true
    versions:
      and:
      - version-gt: 4.0.0
      - version-lt: 5.0.0

[aelsabbahy]

Just to clarify, @pedroMMM PR is a great addition for a semver matcher. I'm looking forward to that PR as it will allow goss with minor changes to support semver matching for command/http/file resources.

However, this does not solve package versioning/ranges, a quick test on the debian test image fails to parse for ~7-8% of the installed packages.

Also, rpm does not adhere to semantic versioning, for example.. but goss currently only checks '%{Version}' and not release, so may be a moot point for now.. Although, they may have to be added back in to do proper version comparisons in the future.

Here's an example where semver and rpm do different things:
https://semver.org/#spec-item-11

Example: 1.0.0-alpha < 1.0.0-alpha.1 < 1.0.0-alpha.beta < 1.0.0-beta < 1.0.0-beta.2 < 1.0.0-beta.11 < 1.0.0-rc.1 < 1.0.0.

# rpmdev-vercmp '1.0.0-rc.1' '1.0.0'
1.0.0-rc.1 > 1.0.0

I haven't done a deep enough dive with debian (beyond parsing errors) to see how deb package versions differ from semver.

[aelsabbahy]

@sshipway yesterdays release contains a semver Matcher.

Which package type where you testing with?

[sshipway]

We have Centos/Redhat systems, so RPMs, though I tend to develop on an ubuntu system.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[aelsabbahy]

Tracked in one ticket: #334

[aelsabbahy]

I was mistaken, this is different from #334

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.