| 1 |
Author: zmedico |
| 2 |
Date: 2010-01-29 18:45:23 +0000 (Fri, 29 Jan 2010) |
| 3 |
New Revision: 15234 |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Modified: |
| 6 |
main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/tests/versions/test_vercmp.py |
| 7 |
main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/versions.py |
| 8 |
Log: |
| 9 |
Revert r15161 so 12.2.5 is greater than 12.2b once again. Depending on how you |
| 10 |
look at, it may seem counter-intuitive. However, if you really think about it, |
| 11 |
it seems like it's probably safe to assume that 12.2.5 > 12.2b is the behavior |
| 12 |
that is intended by anyone who would use versions such as these. (trunk r15166) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Modified: main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/tests/versions/test_vercmp.py |
| 15 |
=================================================================== |
| 16 |
--- main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/tests/versions/test_vercmp.py 2010-01-29 18:45:14 UTC (rev 15233) |
| 17 |
+++ main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/tests/versions/test_vercmp.py 2010-01-29 18:45:23 UTC (rev 15234) |
| 18 |
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ |
| 19 |
("cvs.9999", "9999"), |
| 20 |
("999999999999999999999999999999", "999999999999999999999999999998"), |
| 21 |
("1.0.0", "1.0"), |
| 22 |
- ("1.0b", "1.0.0"), |
| 23 |
+ ("1.0.0", "1.0b"), |
| 24 |
("1b", "1"), |
| 25 |
("1b_p1", "1_p1"), |
| 26 |
("1.1b", "1.1"), |
| 27 |
- ("12.2b", "12.2.5"), |
| 28 |
+ ("12.2.5", "12.2b"), |
| 29 |
] |
| 30 |
for test in tests: |
| 31 |
self.failIf( vercmp( test[0], test[1] ) <= 0, msg="%s < %s? Wrong!" % (test[0],test[1]) ) |
| 32 |
@@ -41,11 +41,11 @@ |
| 33 |
("1.0-r0", "1.0-r1"), |
| 34 |
("1.0", "1.0-r1"), |
| 35 |
("1.0", "1.0.0"), |
| 36 |
- ("1.0.0", "1.0b"), |
| 37 |
+ ("1.0b", "1.0.0"), |
| 38 |
("1_p1", "1b_p1"), |
| 39 |
("1", "1b"), |
| 40 |
("1.1", "1.1b"), |
| 41 |
- ("12.2.5", "12.2b"), |
| 42 |
+ ("12.2b", "12.2.5"), |
| 43 |
] |
| 44 |
for test in tests: |
| 45 |
self.failIf( vercmp( test[0], test[1]) >= 0, msg="%s > %s? Wrong!" % (test[0],test[1])) |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Modified: main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/versions.py |
| 48 |
=================================================================== |
| 49 |
--- main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/versions.py 2010-01-29 18:45:14 UTC (rev 15233) |
| 50 |
+++ main/branches/2.1.7/pym/portage/versions.py 2010-01-29 18:45:23 UTC (rev 15234) |
| 51 |
@@ -103,23 +103,7 @@ |
| 52 |
if match1.group(3) or match2.group(3): |
| 53 |
vlist1 = match1.group(3)[1:].split(".") |
| 54 |
vlist2 = match2.group(3)[1:].split(".") |
| 55 |
- else: |
| 56 |
- vlist1 = [] |
| 57 |
- vlist2 = [] |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
- if match1.group(5) or match2.group(5): |
| 60 |
- # and now the final letter |
| 61 |
- if match1.group(5): |
| 62 |
- vlist1.append(str(ord(match1.group(5)))) |
| 63 |
- else: |
| 64 |
- vlist1.append('0') |
| 65 |
- if match2.group(5): |
| 66 |
- vlist2.append(str(ord(match2.group(5)))) |
| 67 |
- else: |
| 68 |
- vlist2.append('0') |
| 69 |
- |
| 70 |
- if vlist1 or vlist2: |
| 71 |
- |
| 72 |
for i in range(0, max(len(vlist1), len(vlist2))): |
| 73 |
# Implcit .0 is given a value of -1, so that 1.0.0 > 1.0, since it |
| 74 |
# would be ambiguous if two versions that aren't literally equal |
| 75 |
@@ -148,6 +132,17 @@ |
| 76 |
list1.append(int(vlist1[i].ljust(max_len, "0"))) |
| 77 |
list2.append(int(vlist2[i].ljust(max_len, "0"))) |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
+ # and now the final letter |
| 80 |
+ # NOTE: Behavior changed in r2309 (between portage-2.0.x and portage-2.1). |
| 81 |
+ # The new behavior is 12.2.5 > 12.2b which, depending on how you look at, |
| 82 |
+ # may seem counter-intuitive. However, if you really think about it, it |
| 83 |
+ # seems like it's probably safe to assume that this is the behavior that |
| 84 |
+ # is intended by anyone who would use versions such as these. |
| 85 |
+ if len(match1.group(5)): |
| 86 |
+ list1.append(ord(match1.group(5))) |
| 87 |
+ if len(match2.group(5)): |
| 88 |
+ list2.append(ord(match2.group(5))) |
| 89 |
+ |
| 90 |
for i in range(0, max(len(list1), len(list2))): |
| 91 |
if len(list1) <= i: |
| 92 |
vercmp_cache[mykey] = -1 |
Archives