Re: Version numbers going backwards

[John Klos <john%klos.com@localhost>]

> >  So why is it we can't not get vim thinking it depends on two versions of
> >  vim-share after all these years? I haven't been able to figure it out.

(or the other way around - I was misremembering)

> The thing is, vim depends on the exact same version of vim-share. So you 
> cannot update one without updating the other. If our package tools were a bit 
> smarter, they would deal with that properly -- if you do a single transaction 
> updating both, that should be fine.

I'm aware. I'm referring to the bug that happens when you try to update 
vim-share, which should automatically update vim, and we end up with:

===> replace-message [vim-share-9.0.1598nb1] ===> Replacing for vim-share-9.0.1598nb1
===> replace-destdir [vim-share-9.0.1598nb1] ===> Updating using binary package of vim-share-9.0.1598nb1
/usr/bin/env  /usr/local/sbin/pkg_add -K /usr/local/pkgdb -U -D 
/usr/pkgsrc/editors/vim-share/work/.packages/vim-share-9.0.1598nb1.tgz
pkg_add: Can't open +CONTENTS of depending package vim-9.0.0960
pkg_add: 1 package addition failed
*** Error code 1

pkg_delete vim-9.0.0960
pkg_delete: No matching package for basename `vim-9.0.0960' of `vim-9.0.0960'
pkg_delete vim-share
Package `vim-share-9.0.1598' is still required by other packages:
	vim-9.0.0960
	vim-9.0.1598

We've had this for many, many years now. I don't know why it happens 
sometimes but not others.

Thanks,
John