wine versions?

gymnart

unread,

Sep 23, 2007, 4:18:05 PM9/23/07

to

I've noticed something about wine versions:
version 0.9.6 was made in 2006 but:
version 0.9.44 was made this year and was announced as the latest on
wine's site.
shouldn't 0.9.6 be newer than 0.9.44? I'm confused.

John Thompson

unread,

Sep 23, 2007, 10:17:57 PM9/23/07

to

No; wine-0.9.45 is the newest; there have been 39 point releases since
0.9.6 was released last year (6+39=45).

--

John (jo...@os2.dhs.org)

Aggro

unread,

Sep 24, 2007, 11:32:06 AM9/24/07

to

Pay close attention to the dots. "0.9.4.4" is different than "0.9.44"
and 44 is bigger number than 6 is.

gymnart

unread,

Sep 25, 2007, 1:17:42 PM9/25/07

to

Thanks!

Rod Smith

unread,

Sep 28, 2007, 2:47:12 PM9/28/07

to

In article <slrnffe7i...@vector.os2.dhs.org>,

I can't speak for the OP, but this can be confusing if one is used to
ordinary decimal arithmetic but not to program version numbers. In
ordinary arithmetic, 9.44 is indeed less than 9.6. The problem is that
program version numbers don't follow the usual rules for decimal numbers;
anytime a sub-version number rises above 9, it starts looking weird from
the point of view of the usual arithmetic rules. In this specific case,
the existence of two decimal points (0.9.44, etc.) is a clue to this fact,
but by itself that doesn't really help. Perhaps it would have been better
if the decimal notation had never been adopted, but that ship has long
since sailed....

--
Rod Smith, rods...@rodsbooks.com
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking

gymnart

unread,

Sep 28, 2007, 4:31:05 PM9/28/07

to

On Sep 28, 2:47 pm, rodsm...@nessus.rodsbooks.com (Rod Smith) wrote:
> In article <slrnffe7ik.pst.j...@vector.os2.dhs.org>,

> John Thompson <j...@vector.os2.dhs.org> writes:
>
>
>
> > On 2007-09-23, gymnart <ses...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> I've noticed something about wine versions:
> >> version 0.9.6 was made in 2006 but:
> >> version 0.9.44 was made this year and was announced as the latest on
> >> wine's site.
> >> shouldn't 0.9.6 be newer than 0.9.44? I'm confused.
>
> > No; wine-0.9.45 is the newest; there have been 39 point releases since
> > 0.9.6 was released last year (6+39=45).
>
> I can't speak for the OP, but this can be confusing if one is used to
> ordinary decimal arithmetic but not to program version numbers. In
> ordinary arithmetic, 9.44 is indeed less than 9.6. The problem is that
> program version numbers don't follow the usual rules for decimal numbers;
> anytime a sub-version number rises above 9, it starts looking weird from
> the point of view of the usual arithmetic rules. In this specific case,
> the existence of two decimal points (0.9.44, etc.) is a clue to this fact,
> but by itself that doesn't really help. Perhaps it would have been better
> if the decimal notation had never been adopted, but that ship has long
> since sailed....
>
> --

> Rod Smith, rodsm...@rodsbooks.comhttp://www.rodsbooks.com

> Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking

Thank you for that explanation. I will watch out for that.