VersionCheckNew testing

Afrow UKMarch 22, 2005 at 5:28 PM#

I've tried and tested the function so many times, but there's always one version string comparison kind that gets through with false results.

The last update to the function was to compare each digit of the numbers between the dots one by one. However, recently Daijoubu reported that it would fail on 7 & 10. This is because it would compare 7 with 1 and immediately think the 1st one was larger! I've fixed the problem now (which has made the function even bigger!)

I was wondering if anyone could test the function more for me, which is here:

http://nsis.sourceforge.net/archive/edit.php?pageid=533&instances=0,757

If you find one that fails, post it here so I can see it.

Cheers

-Stu

InstructorMarch 23, 2005 at 7:10 AM#edited March 23, 2005 at 7:32 AM

Probably Afrow UK mean:

http://nsis.sourceforge.net/archive/nsisweb.php?page=757&instances=0,11,122,754

InstructorMarch 23, 2005 at 7:58 AM#

(which has made the function even bigger!)

It's because there is check per digit per number and many exceptions. I choose other way - digits capacity in VersionCompare. I don't found any false results in VersionCheckNew (v4).

Afrow UKMarch 23, 2005 at 10:55 AM#

Ah yeh, sorry I posted link to edit 🙂

-Stu

InstructorMarch 28, 2005 at 7:10 AM#

${VersionCheckNew} "91.1.1.1" "101.1.1.1" $R0

$R0="1"

Afrow UKMarch 28, 2005 at 5:02 PM#

Thanks Instructor. I found that problem a few days ago too and I think it's fixed now. It took me a few hours, but I thought of a new solution which should fix all the problems.
Uploaded as v5

-Stu

InstructorMarch 29, 2005 at 6:22 AM#

Very bad that you don't trying to see what do others 🙁

P.S.

${VersionCheckV5} "1.001" "1.0" $R0

$R0="2"

Afrow UKMarch 29, 2005 at 8:15 AM#

Thanks fixed.

-Stu

glory_manJune 7, 2005 at 10:08 AM#

Version "1.00" is newer than "1.0". Is it supposed to be?

Afrow UKJune 7, 2005 at 10:11 AM#

I'd just use Instructors VersionCompare 😛

-Stu

glory_manJune 7, 2005 at 10:33 AM#

Another question (general).
Why "1.1.1.1" not equal to "1.1.1.01"?

Afrow UKJune 7, 2005 at 10:57 AM#

Because 01 is older than 1, as we go up in 01, 02, 03, to 1. 1 would be counted as "10".

-Stu

glory_manJune 7, 2005 at 11:12 AM#

Than, if I include in script

VIProductVersion "1.1.0.001"

VIAddVersionKey "LegalCopyright" 'Ltd.'

VIAddVersionKey "FileDescription" "Test file"

VIAddVersionKey "FileVersion" "1.1.0.001"

And use GetDllVersion - version will be 1.1.0.1. Why?

Afrow UKJune 7, 2005 at 11:17 AM#

NSIS treats 001 in a variable as 1 (when using IntOp)

-Stu

deguixJune 7, 2005 at 5:15 PM#

Because 01 is older than 1, as we go up in 01, 02, 03, to 1. 1 would be counted as "10".

My opinion is that, the extra zeros in versions are just to show how the author organizes his versions. I think, zeros should be ignored if they are on the left of the number. Example: 1.01 = 1.00001. By this reasoning, I think Afrow UK is wrong in saying that 1.01 is older than 1.1, because it's like giving the extra digit a separation mark, like the ".". With Afrow's idea, what would be newer: 1.00, 1.0 or 1?

To make a version comparasion with only numbers, it's a matter of comparing the numbers inside the four groups w/ IntCmp, nothing more (and logically converting those numbers to be supported as decimal by NSIS, because 001 is considered as an octal number).

InstructorJune 8, 2005 at 5:30 AM#

I think, zeros should be ignored if they are on the left of the number. Example: 1.01 = 1.00001. By this reasoning, I think Afrow UK is wrong in saying that 1.01 is older than 1.1, because it's like giving the extra digit a separation mark, like the ".".

Afrow UK isn't wrong:
1.01 != 1.00001, because 1.01 != 1.10
In your words NSIS 2.01 = NSIS 2.1 (it will be I hope 🙂 )

glory_manJune 8, 2005 at 8:43 AM#

My opinion is that, the extra zeros in versions are just to show how the author organizes his versions. I think, zeros should be ignored if they are on the left of the number. Example: 1.01 = 1.00001. By this reasoning, I think Afrow UK is wrong in saying that 1.01 is older than 1.1, because it's like giving the extra digit a separation mark, like the ".".

I am subscribe to this opinion.

2Instructor

Afrow UK isn't wrong:
1.01 != 1.00001, because 1.01 != 1.10
In your words NSIS 2.01 = NSIS 2.1 (it will be I hope 🙂)

I don't agree. NSIS 2.01 has full version number 2.0.1, NSIS 2.1 wil be - 2.1.0.
In your words 1 kg 1000 times greater than 0001 kg.🙂😁

InstructorJune 8, 2005 at 9:23 AM#

What sense give to the program version 1.01, if the same is 1.1? I saw only one reason: if number 1.01 compared with 1.1 it will be older 🙂

onadJune 8, 2005 at 9:37 AM#

TIP: Versioning scheme as I see it...

I agree there is IMHO no sense in versioning 1.02
This is for me v1.0.2.x
Versioning scheme as I see it...

A.B.C.D

A = Product Major Version
B = Product Feature Release
C = Product Release incrementeal ID
D = Fix/Test/Debug/ for short the Build number

Example for a e.g. wordprocessor:

0.x = Initial development
1.0.0.0 = Initial Debug Release
1.0.0.57 = 57th testing build
1.0.1.1 = Initial "official" build
1.0.1.33 = 33rd fix for the official build
1.0.2.1 = Second "official" build including all bug fixes
1.1.1.278 = Now we have a spell checker
1.2.1.45 = And a thesaurus.
2.0.1.352 = And we introduced Linux compatibility because we built it with Kylix 🙂

Use this structure internally, it works very well. A customer needs to know A.B for features, A.B.C for fixes to features, and we use D internally for testing/debugging and emergency fixes for when taxes don't add up.

Success to everyone to streamline the versioning of your releases.

Emin

Comm@nder21June 10, 2005 at 1:06 PM#

normally its used this way:
major.minor.release.build

for most open source projects:
1.0.0.xxx - first public release
1.1.0.1 - first beta for 1.2 release
1.2.0.xxx - second public release
1.9.xx.xxx - beta releases for 2.0 RC
2.0.0.xxx - second major version, means bigger changes.

and so on ...
the last number ("build") is increased everytime a new beta/release is build and reset everytime the releasenumber changes.

GuestJune 10, 2005 at 8:46 PM#

you try this ... i didn't find any problem

!insertmacro STRFUNC_DEFFUNC VersionCheck
!define VersionCheck_List `ResultVar|CurVersion|CmpVersion`
!define VersionCheck_TypeList `Output 0 1 2|Text|Text`
!macro `FUNCTION_STRING_UnVersionCheck`
!undef UnVersionCheck
!insertmacro FUNCTION_STRING_VersionCheck
!macroend

!macro FUNCTION_STRING_VersionCheck
!insertmacro STRFUNC_FUNC `VersionCheck` `2004 - 2005 Tu Tong - Based on functions by Tu Tong`

Exch $R0
Exch
Exch $R1
Exch
Push $R2
Push $R3
Push $R4
Push $R5
Push $R6
Push $R7

StrCmp $R0 "" error 0
StrCmp $R1 "" error 0

StrCmp $R0 $R1 sameversion 0

ClearErrors
loop:
IfErrors sameversion
StrCmp $R0 "" sameversion
StrCmp $R1 "" sameversion

StrCpy $R4 $R0
GetLabelAddress $R7 return
Goto parse
return:
StrCpy $R6 $R3
StrCpy $R0 $R4

StrCpy $R4 $R1
GetLabelAddress $R7 return1
Goto parse
return1:
StrCpy $R5 $R3
StrCpy $R1 $R4

IntCmp $R6 $R5 0 olderversion newerversion
Goto loop

parse:
StrCpy $R2 0
StrLen $R5 $R4
parseloop:
StrCpy $R3 $R4 1 $R2
StrCmp $R3 "." parsecpy 0
IntCmp $R5 $R2 parsecpy parsecpy 0
IntOp $R2 $R2 + 1
Goto parseloop

parsecpy:
StrCpy $R3 $R4 $R2

IntOp $R5 $R5 - $R2
IntOp $R2 $R2 + 1
StrCpy $R4 $R4 $R5 $R2
Goto $R7

newerversion:
StrCpy $R0 "2"
Goto checkdone

sameversion:
StrCpy $R0 "0"
Goto checkdone

olderversion:
StrCpy $R0 "1"
Goto checkdone

error:
StrCpy $R0 ""

checkdone:
ClearErrors

Pop $R7
Pop $R6
Pop $R5
Pop $R4
Pop $R3
Pop $R2
Pop $R1
Exch $R0

;------------------------
;End

FunctionEnd

!macro FUNCTION_STRING_VersionCheck_Call ResultVar CurVersion CmpVersion
!verbose push
!verbose 4
!echo `$ {VersionCheck} "${ResultVar}" "${CurVersion}" "${CmpVersion}"`
!verbose pop

Push `${CurVersion}`
Push `${CmpVersion}`
Call VersionCheck
Pop `${ResultVar}`
!macroend
!macro FUNCTION_STRING_UnVersionCheck_Call ResultVar CurVersion CmpVersion
!verbose push
!verbose 4
!echo `$ {UnVersionCheck} "${ResultVar}" "${CurVersion}" "${CmpVersion}"`
!verbose pop

Push `${CurVersion}`
Push `${CmpVersion}`
Call un.VersionCheck
Pop `${ResultVar}`
!macroend

!macroend

deguixJune 11, 2005 at 1:10 AM#

It's better for you to post a normal function, because UseFunc (old StrFunc) is being developed, so this function would need to be changed to adapt to future newer versions.

GuestAugust 24, 2005 at 6:50 PM#

okay deguix i'll post normal function

here my update

Function VersionCheck
Exch $R1
Exch
Exch $R0
Exch
Push $R2
Push $R3
Push $R4
Push $R5
Push $R6

${If} $R0 == ""
${OrIf} $R1 == ""
Goto Error
${EndIf}

StrCmp $R0 $R1 sameversion

StrCpy $R4 $R0
Call :complete
StrCpy $R0 $R4

StrCpy $R4 $R1
Call :complete
StrCpy $R1 $R4

Goto compare

complete:
StrCpy $R6 0
StrCpy $R2 0
StrLen $R5 $R4
${Do}
StrCpy $R3 $R4 1 $R2
${If} $R3 == "."
IntOp $R6 $R6 + 1
${EndIf}
${IfThen} $R2 >= $R5 ${|} ${ExitDo} ${|}
IntOp $R2 $R2 + 1
${Loop}

${Select} $R6
${Case} 0
StrCpy $R4 "$R4.0.0.0"
${Case} 1
StrCpy $R4 "$R4.0.0"
${Case} 2
StrCpy $R4 "$R4.0"
${CaseElse}
StrCpy $R4 "$R4"
${EndSelect}
Return

compare:
ClearErrors
Loop:
IfErrors sameversion
StrCmp $R0 "" sameversion
StrCmp $R1 "" sameversion

StrCpy $R4 $R0
Call 😛arse
StrCpy $R6 $R3
StrCpy $R0 $R4

StrCpy $R4 $R1
Call 😛arse
StrCpy $R5 $R3
StrCpy $R1 $R4

IntCmp $R6 $R5 0 olderversion newerversion
Goto Loop

parse:
StrCpy $R2 0
StrLen $R5 $R4
${Do}
StrCpy $R3 $R4 1 $R2
${IfThen} $R3 == "." ${|} ${ExitDo} ${|}
${IfThen} $R2 >= $R5 ${|} ${ExitDo} ${|}
IntOp $R2 $R2 + 1
${Loop}

StrCpy $R3 $R4 $R2

IntOp $R5 $R5 - $R2
IntOp $R2 $R2 + 1
StrCpy $R4 $R4 $R5 $R2
Return

olderversion:
StrCpy $R0 "2"
Goto checkdone

newerversion:
StrCpy $R0 "1"
Goto checkdone

sameversion:
StrCpy $R0 "0"
Goto checkdone

error:
StrCpy $R0 ""

checkdone:
ClearErrors

Pop $R6
Pop $R5
Pop $R4
Pop $R3
Pop $R2
Pop $R1
Exch $R0

FunctionEnd