Product Version for Patch

[nmoffatt]

Hi,

I'm having an issue with the creation of a patch and wanted to see if there was an issue with the following scenario:

1) I have created a release of our software at: 5.5.0
2) A second release has been made at: 5.5.1

The version number has been set in the project properties.

Now I am trying to create a patch for a new version called: 5.5.1.47531

I have added the 2 patch references and tried to created the patch, but I am getting the error:

Error during build: Unable to create patch database [This patch contains multiple transform sets and is a mixture of QFE, minor, and/or major patches.]

If I try and create a patch and change the version number to: 5.5.2 it works OK.

MY question is the last digit (in my case the 4th) evaluated when comparing versions? It appears to only be considering the 3rd digit and ignoring the 4th one.

Perhaps my 2 previous installers should have had a 4 digit version number. . .

I'm not sure where the problem lies so any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Neil

[nmoffatt]

I've done a round of testing with a sample project that reproduced the problem.

1) Create the first installation with the product version set to 5.1.0
2) Create the second installation with the product version set to 5.1.1
3) Create a third installation with the product version set to 5.1.1.47555
4) Now create a patch and add references to 5.1.0 and 5.1.1 (keep the product version at 5.1.1.47555)

The following error is displayed:

Error during build: Unable to create patch database [This patch contains multiple transform sets and is a mixture of QFE, minor, and/or major patches.]

5) Change the version number to 5.1.2.47555
6) Create the patch. It will be successfully be built

Please let me know if there is a solution to this problem.

Thanks,

Neil

[giaviv]

Neil,

It appears as if as though the 4th digit in the version is not taken into account by the patch mechanism. Could you please confirm?

[nmoffatt]

Yes that is the case. Would you happen to have a fix?

Thanks,

Neil

[giaviv]

Neil,

We will look into it - thank you for your comment!