[wpkg-users] value have underscores?

[Paul McGrath]

Semian,
  I am using it for file exists 'Flash32_%VERSION%.ocx'
Might have to have two variables if I ever want to do versiongreaterorequal
Thanks
Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: wpkg-users-bounces at lists.wpkg.org [mailto:wpkg-users-bounces at lists.wpkg.org] On Behalf Of Semián Matej
Sent: 15 May 2012 14:42
To: wpkg-users at lists.wpkg.org
Subject: Re: [wpkg-users] value have underscores?

Hello.

It does not work for version checks.. So be avare of this in your scripts.

Log:

File version check for file
'H:\WINDOWS\System32\Macromed\Flash\Flash32_11_2_202_235.ocx' returned false for operation type versiongreaterorequal.
Checking file version 11.2.202.235 is versiongreaterorequal (than)
11_2_202_235 - got result -1.



Dne 15.5.2012 12:24, Paul McGrath napsal(a):
> Thanks Rainer,
>    Whilst I was waiting a reply I had a test myself and it worked.  I didn't go as deep as you and 'debug'.
>    I asked because the latest Adobe Flash ocx and dll files are now named including the version as underscores.  So a file exists check is easier than before.
> BW
> Paul
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rainer Meier [mailto:r.meier at wpkg.org]
> Sent: 15 May 2012 11:10
> To: Paul McGrath
> Cc: wpkg-users at lists.wpkg.org
> Subject: Re: [wpkg-users] value have underscores?
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> On 15.05.2012 10:40, Paul McGrath wrote:
>> So far I have just used '.' (dots, full stops, periods!) to denote 
>> version variables. Is it possible to use '_' (underscores) e.g.
>>
>> <variable name="version" value="11_1_102_55"/>
>>
>> If the version is incremented then will upgrade work based on a value 
>> containing '_'?
>
> I've done a quick test and in this case it works. Quickly tested your version number and then upgraded to 11_1_102_56:
>
>
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, DEBUG   : Comparing version: '11_1_102_56'<=>  '11_1_102_55'.
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, DEBUG   : Comparing version fragments: '11'<=>  '11'
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, DEBUG   : Comparing version fragments: '1'<=>  '1'
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, DEBUG   : Comparing version fragments: '102'<=>  '102'
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, DEBUG   : Comparing version fragments: '56'<=>  '55'
> 2012-05-15 12:03:07, INFO    : Package 'Testing package' (test): Already
> installed but version mismatch.|Installed revision: 
> '11_1_102_55'|Available
> revision: '11_1_102_56'.|Preparing upgrade.
>
>
> Although I still recommend to use standard "dotted" notation as the 
> above one works only because WPKG splits each part of the version 
> number by non-numeric characters. So therefore 11_1_102_55 is not 
> interpreted as "11.1.102.55" but as the expression 11_1_102_55 which 
> is split into distinct numbers and then compared piece by piece.
>
> But as said, in your case it works perfectly as long as you just use 
> digits split by non-digit characters. Seamlessly 11v1v102v55 would work too.
>
> br,
> Rainer
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- wpkg-users mailing list archives>>  
> http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/wpkg-users/
> _______________________________________________
> wpkg-users mailing list
> wpkg-users at lists.wpkg.org
> http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkg-users

--
S pozdravem
Matěj Semián

Stavební bytové družstvo POKROK
Kollárova 157/18, Praha 8
tel. 225 339 402

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
wpkg-users mailing list archives >> http://lists.wpkg.org/pipermail/wpkg-users/
_______________________________________________
wpkg-users mailing list
wpkg-users at lists.wpkg.org
http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkg-users