On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Xavier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Xavier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apparently the static strings were a show stopper to Dan.
I don't have a problem with static strings, since it removes the
malloc/free overhead and also
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:54 AM, Xavier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:14 AM, Dan McGee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll admit defeat, I tried. :)
Can someone put together a single revert patch to take care of this? I
know it took us at least two commits to get the vercmp
It indeed looks like we just need to handle the case where it runs out
of segments on one string.
But we have to handle two cases : run out of segments with the
-release number or without it.
So in both cases, I handle it differently if the last remaining
segment starts with a letter or not.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Nagy Gabor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It indeed looks like we just need to handle the case where it runs out
of segments on one string.
But we have to handle two cases : run out of segments with the
-release number or without it.
So in both cases, I handle it
This note inspired me to test '1.0. == 1.0'
You may think that this is useless, but image '1.0 ' versus
'1.0' (extra spacebar, '\n' etc. character). The old code beats the
new one again :-P
I mean 3.1 vercmp code beats 3.2 vercmp code. Xav, your patch is
excellent. (And I just joked here, of
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Nagy Gabor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK. I believe that RPM guys are cool guys;-) I think they simply don't
need this mplayer 1.0rc2 versus 1.0 stuff, because they use different
versioning scheme (as I see):
http://dag.wieers.com/rpm/packages/mplayer/
I agree
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Xavier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Nagy Gabor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK. I believe that RPM guys are cool guys;-) I think they simply don't
need this mplayer 1.0rc2 versus 1.0 stuff, because they use different
versioning scheme
