| 1 |
While reading tosay's PMS draft, i've seen the following (§9.2.1), which |
| 2 |
reminded me this old discussion: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> = Exactly equal to the specified version. Special exception: if the |
| 5 |
> version specified has an asterisk immediately following it, a string |
| 6 |
> prefix comparison is used instead. When an asterisk is used, the |
| 7 |
> specification must remain valid if the asterisk were removed. (An |
| 8 |
> asterisk used with any other operator is illegal.) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
This ratifies the current substring matching semantics, and excludes the |
| 11 |
"=foo/bar-1.2.*" syntax addition that has been suggested in this thread. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Re-reading the thread, i'm not sure what the conclusion was, if any. |
| 14 |
If there was a consensus on this, then it's all good. But if not, then |
| 15 |
maybe it's still time to change it without waiting for EAPI-1. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Imho, it would be a good thing to drop the substring matching and |
| 18 |
replace it with a "1.2* is 1.2(.Y)*(_suffix)?(-rY)?" semantics. As |
| 19 |
already pointed, only a tenth of ebuilds would need to be fixed if |
| 20 |
this semantics restriction was adopted, so it sounds doable. But sure, |
| 21 |
that's just my opinion, and i have no strong argument but that it sounds |
| 22 |
closer to what most people need, and intuitivly expect. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
</friendly reminder> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
TGL. |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives