On Tuesday 01 August 2006 13:19, Brian Harring wrote:
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 12:48:05AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 31 July 2006 23:57, Drake Wyrm wrote:
The question I'm trying to ask is this: =foo-1.2.* should obviously
match foo-1.2.3, but should it also match on foo-1.2?
Brian Harring wrote:
Response to this is that well don't have versions like that,
which while valid, is ignoring the point- cpvs are exact in their
version specification, there isn't anything implicit about them.
This sounds to me like 'division through zero doesn't make sense, but
i've
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:23PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work
as I thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as well as
foo-1.2.3.
snip
but I'd suspect that many people share
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:55:09PM -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:23PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work
as I thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:55:09PM -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:23PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't
work as I thought, as
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 06:12:46PM -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:55:09PM -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 07:42:23PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
Was just brought to my
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 31 July 2006 21:37, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
short term we're gaining functionality: simply add .*
Just making sure that I understand you... Given the original example
atom of =foo-1.2*, which currently
