| 1 |
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: |
| 2 |
> While reading tosay's PMS draft, i've seen the following (§9.2.1), which |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> reminded me this old discussion: |
| 5 |
> > = Exactly equal to the specified version. Special exception: if the |
| 6 |
> > version specified has an asterisk immediately following it, a string |
| 7 |
> > prefix comparison is used instead. When an asterisk is used, the |
| 8 |
> > specification must remain valid if the asterisk were removed. (An |
| 9 |
> > asterisk used with any other operator is illegal.) |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> This ratifies the current substring matching semantics, and excludes the |
| 12 |
> "=foo/bar-1.2.*" syntax addition that has been suggested in this thread. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
=foo/bar-1.2.* has never been valid and still isnt valid in current |
| 15 |
portage ... i dont see a reason to force it in for EAPI=0 considering we've |
| 16 |
gotten by so far without it being a big deal |
| 17 |
-mike |
Archives