Le 08/12/2020 à 10:32, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > Quoting Jonas Smedegaard (2020-12-08 10:04:13) >> Quoting Xavier (2020-12-08 09:44:00) >>> what is wrong in "Breaks: jest (<< 2.26.3+repack~), node-jest-debbundle >>> (<< 2.26.3+repack~)" ? Jest version in unstable is >>> "26.6.3+repack+~cs61.38.31-1" >> >> 7.0.0+~cs8.3.2-1 is higher than 2.26.3+repack~ >> >> ...because 3.2 is higher than 3+ >> >> ...because + means "just above" so beats only nothing or 0. > > Please ignore above - totally crazy of me to compare _node-cosmiconfig_ > version with Breaks value of jest. > > As Andreas posted a moment ago, problem is that the jest version of > 26.6.3+ds+~cs64.28.30-1 is lower than 2.26.3+repack~. > > Seem you forgot to include the +ds suffix, i.e. this should work: > > Breaks: jest (<< 2.26.3+ds+repack~), node-jest-debbundle (<< > 2.26.3+ds+repack~) > > On a related note, I can recommend to generally use suffix ~ds or ~dfsg > for repackaging, to leave room eventually dropping it later it turns out > to be unneeded. If ~ds were used for jest then forgetting to include > the suffix in Breaks would work, but that is just accidental: Correct is > to always include whatever suffix is on the original package version and > then at the end of _full_ version add ~ to cover custom extensions like > ~bpo.
Thanks, I had to replace "ds" by "repack" since checksum decreased: I removed a useless component. I think this is now fixed, I looked the bad part of version, there was a typo on node-cosmiconfig "Breaks" field
