🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep6.020354.5476@cs.cornell.edu>, csuley@cs.cornell.edu (Christopher Suley) writes:
> In article <j-norstad-040992163248@norstad.acns.nwu.edu> j-norstad@nwu.edu (John Norstad) writes:
>>In article <9224811.19747@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>, gleeson@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
>>(Red Mountain) wrote:
>>> So they can release system 7.1.1 and you can't release 2.9.1 ? Not very
>>> nice of them really...
>>
>>I use the second digit for new virus releases, and the third digit for bug
>>fix releases (I've had two in the past, most recently 2.7.1).
>>
> I'd say go ahead and do 2.10, 2.11, etc. (hope we don't need them, sigh)
> White Knight and Red Ryder both did that... isn't White Knight up to
> 11.17 or something?  Or you could introduce Disinfectant Classic.
> Or follow Claris and do Disinfectant II, soon to become Disinfectant Pro.

It's not that simple: what I think John means is that the 'vers'
resource (which gives you some of the info in the Get Info window
in the Finder) only allows one byte for each digit of the version
number (i.e. 3 bytes in total with a filler byte at the front).
Now normally, that would let you go up to 15 for each number, but
the 'vers' resource editor in ResEdit zaps anything larger than 9
and turns it into a zero. Ergo, you can't go higher than 9
(except maybe for the first number).

Of course, if you're not worried about that, you can use any
version number you like... :)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Stanger,                  Internet: stanger@otago.ac.nz
University of Otago,            Phone: +64 3 479-8179
Dunedin, NEW ZEALAND.           Fax:   +64 3 479-8311
"nI Ni NI ni sptang grep fuzzy urgle glunk" -- a (very weird) friend