Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider versions "2.1" and "2.1.0" as same #504

Closed
k-bx opened this issue Jul 3, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

Consider versions "2.1" and "2.1.0" as same #504

k-bx opened this issue Jul 3, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@k-bx
Copy link
Contributor

@k-bx k-bx commented Jul 3, 2015

I just had a minor but confusing problem that I've put protocol-buffers-2.1 into extra-deps, but got a message Didn't see protocol-buffers-2.1 in your package indices, updating and trying again from stack build. The reason, as you might guess, is that it couldn't match versions 2.1 and 2.1.0.

Please confirm that improving version-matcher to handle this would be a way to go. If so – I could take a look at this issue later.

@snoyberg
Copy link
Contributor

@snoyberg snoyberg commented Jul 3, 2015

Unfortunately, I don't think we can do that, since as far as Hackage and cabal are concerned, those are unique versions. However, the error message here could certainly be improved to indicate "did you mean 2.1.0." What do you think about going that route instead?

@snoyberg snoyberg added this to the 0.3.0.0 milestone Jul 3, 2015
@k-bx
Copy link
Contributor Author

@k-bx k-bx commented Jul 3, 2015

@snoyberg yes, that seems like the best way to go. Ok, I'll work on this right after a previous bug I've committed myself to :)

@snoyberg
Copy link
Contributor

@snoyberg snoyberg commented Jul 3, 2015

Awesome :)

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 8:22 AM Kostiantyn Rybnikov notifications@github.com
wrote:

@snoyberg https://github.com/snoyberg yes, that seems like the best way
to go. Ok, I'll work on this right after a previous bug I've committed
myself to :)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#504 (comment)
.

@bergmark
Copy link
Member

@bergmark bergmark commented Jul 7, 2015

An alternative is showing the available versions closest to the one you specified, then it might also give a suggestion for 2.0 and 2.2 if 2.1 doesn't exist

k-bx added a commit to k-bx/stack that referenced this issue Jul 10, 2015
Fixes commercialhaskell#504.

When you get a "Didn't see pkg-<ver> in your package indices" message,
also see list of candidates with same major version. Might be that you
forgot some minor thing like ".0" in the end of a version string.
snoyberg added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 13, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
4 participants