Re: No calc in pretest?

[Jason Rumney]

Jon Cast <address@hidden> writes:

> 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.

Even better, test for features, not for version numbers.

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

Probably because in most cases code does the above.