Re: No calc in pretest?

[Jon Cast]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) wrote:
<snip>
> It uses high-numbered "minor-minor" numbers (which I think is a good
> idea), but the "minor" number of the pretest is plain wrong!

> The pretest has the same minor number as the previous release, so
> code cannot test emacs-minor-version for any practical purpose.

Don't test emacs-minor-version.  Do a lexicographic test on
emacs-version, comparing against 21.3.90.  That'll ensure you've got
any non-CVS release containing the features of 21.4.

> [The current CVS has emacs-minor-version == 3, although we all
> expect the next release to be 21.4].

That'll make the lexicographic test fail (in general).  I, personally,
would be *much* more surprised by a system where version numbers
didn't sort lexicographically than by one in which a particular
component was `wrong'.  Not sure if this made any sense, but I hope
some of it did.

> I don't know any code which breaks because of this though.

> --
> Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk

Jon Cast