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

incorrect version shown marks package ignored (uqm-content) #1288

Closed
mnalis opened this issue Nov 14, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

incorrect version shown marks package ignored (uqm-content) #1288

mnalis opened this issue Nov 14, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@mnalis
Copy link

mnalis commented Nov 14, 2022

On https://repology.org/project/uqm/versions#debian_12

package uqm-content is shown as version 0.8.0+deb with status ignored, which according to docs means:

version is ignored and excluded from comparison for some other reason (e.g. snapshots).

However, correct package version is (and has been for months) 0.8.0+deb-1 as evidented by https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/uqm-content, but it seems to be misdetected by repology by dropping -1 at the end. It is no snapshot, but normal final release of the package.

Could it be fixed if the problem is in repology, or is the problem upstream in Debian?

@AMDmi3
Copy link
Member

AMDmi3 commented Nov 14, 2022

Upstream version is 0.8.0, neither 0.8.0+deb nor 0.8.0+deb-1 is correct and usable by repology. Tailing -N component is dropped from deb versions as it denotes a debian revision and is not usable for version comparison, but it does not affect this case.

@AMDmi3 AMDmi3 closed this as completed Nov 14, 2022
@AMDmi3 AMDmi3 reopened this Nov 14, 2022
@AMDmi3 AMDmi3 transferred this issue from repology/repology-webapp Nov 14, 2022
@AMDmi3 AMDmi3 closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Nov 14, 2022
@mnalis
Copy link
Author

mnalis commented Nov 14, 2022

Thanks for quick reply and clarification on repology use!

In Debian, +deb, +dfsg and +ds are AFAIK common debian-specific upstream-version suffix for repacked stuff (e.g. due to upstream tarball not being DFSG-free, multiple sources being merged into one package etc.). So it is part of Debian revision code, and not upstream version.

I don't know if/how you want to add handling of that to repology, though.

In either case, it might be a good idea to mention in a FAQ repology/repology-webapp#180 (if/when it gets done) what ignored actually means / when it is triggered. Current oneliner at https://repology.org/docs/about is misleading at least in such cases.

@AMDmi3 AMDmi3 transferred this issue from repology/repology-rules Nov 14, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants