On 11/04/2014 at 12:12 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt writes ("Re: Punctuation characters in Debian
> packaging"):
>
>> No. I don't think package names should be forbidden just because
>> APT treats them in a special way. Otherwise you would have to
>> forbid "+" and "." anywhere in package names as well as trailing
>> "-" as apt treats all of those in a special way:
>>
>> apt-get -s remove b.sh apt-get -s remove ba+sh
>
> WTF. So if you actually want apt-get to work reliably you have to
> quote everything ? Surely that's a rather alarming misfeature.
>
> I had a look through archive.debian.org and there are _lots_ of
> packages whose names end in `+' (typically, `++'), many of which
> exist in sid.That's why I didn't propose forbidding package names which end in - or +. What I did propose is forbidding adding a (binary) package whose name is the result of either appending + or - to an existing package name, or removing a trailing + or - from an existing package name. > apt-get seems to prefer actual package names to ones resulting from > stripping `+' (which is also IMO a bug). Can you explain why this would be considered a bug? It seems to produce the desired behavior in every case I've been able to think of so far. > I haven't (yet) found any package names ending in `-' but I wouldn't > be surprised to find some. There aren't any in current stable, testing, stable/updates, or testing/updates, at least. That was the first thing I checked. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
