I'll get on testing this on 10-STABLE in the morning.

Thanks Devin

-- 
 Jason Hellenthal
 Voice: 95.30.17.6/616
 JJH48-ARIN

> On Feb 21, 2014, at 20:17, <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Nielsen [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 9:06 AM
>> To: Devin Teske
>> Cc: Jason Hellenthal; [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: network.subr _aliasN handling
>> 
>>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 4:25 AM, Teske, Devin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I believe I know what you mean by that but in a way scares me when
> you say
>> sort as in mixing up the original order they appear in which I would
> find to be
>> really unattractive to most.
>>> 
>>> It's not as scary as it sounds.
>>> 
>>> The issue is that the variables are sorted alphabetically, instead of
>>> numerically.
>>> 
>>> Let's take four words: foo1, foo2, foo10, and foo20.
>>> If you sort them alphabetically, you get:
>>> 
>>>    foo1
>>>    foo10
>>>    foo2
>>>    foo20
>>> 
>>> You'll notice this when doing a directory listing, as that too is
>>> sorted alphabetically.
>>> 
>>> This is why "alias14" is run before "alias8" and "alias9". Because
>>> they are processed in alphabetically sorted order. I didn't do
>>> anything to sort the values, they came pre-sorted in alphabetic order.
>>> 
>>> If I simply throw in a "| sort -n", then it will change it to
> numerically sorted.
>>> As you might expect, numerically sorting the above list would result
> in:
>>> 
>>>    foo1
>>>    foo2
>>>    foo10
>>>    foo20
>>> 
>>> Trivial really. I'll throw a patch at you when I get some cycles
> (soon).
>> 
>> Hi Devin, Jason-
>> 
>> I've been behind on my mailing list e-mail for a while, but I really
> like the idea
>> and the patch proposed here. I don't see anything like it in head yet,
> so ... Ping?
>> :)
>> 
>> JN
> [Devin Teske] 
> 
> *** this time with attached patch.txt ***
> 
> Hi JN, here's a new patch that incorporates numerical sorting as well as
> what
> the original patch set out to do ... make "gaps" possible (so that you
> could
> comment out an alias without having to renumber all the ones following).
> 
> Give it a look, let me know what you think.
> -- 
> Devin
> 
> _____________
> The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. 
> If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all 
> copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; 
> and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that 
> any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by 
> persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
> <patch.txt>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to