Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Hello, as reported in RH bugzilla #253817 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253817), there is an issue with ls -v (and there will be same issue with sort -V soon). Problem is with sorting files with extensions or dist-tags (like .tar.gz) because .tar.gz is more than .1.tar.gz. Therefore

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Ondřej Vašík wrote: > as reported in RH bugzilla #253817 > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253817), there is an issue > with ls -v (and there will be same issue with sort -V soon). Problem is > with sorting files with extensions or dist-tags (like .tar.gz) > because .tar.gz is more tha

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Bruno Haible wrote: > Ondřej Vašík wrote: > > 3) to use/create different function for handling version sort (like > > rpmvercmp in recommended in glibc strverscmp() bugzilla) > > Does rpmvercmp have the above property? Similar. It separates name, epoch, version, release and architecture and comp

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bruno Haible wrote: >> Ondřej Vašík wrote: >> > 3) to use/create different function for handling version sort (like >> > rpmvercmp in recommended in glibc strverscmp() bugzilla) >> >> Does rpmvercmp have the above property? > > Similar. It separates nam

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

> > > > I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the > > patch. If those are not pure boolean then you have a bug anyway. > > Here are some of the changes needed to protect against the substandard > "bool" problem we're talking about. Some of the changes (& => &&) > a

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

I propose a simple patch for gnulib/strverscmp, which make this function much more useful. Note that this patch is not related to any distribution. It just cut off any postfix after version string. Current version of coreutils uses strverscmp from gnulib, so if you want to test this patch, you

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Blake) wrote: >> > I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the >> > patch. If those are not pure boolean then you have a bug anyway. >> >> Here are some of the changes needed to protect against the substandard >> "bool" problem we're talking abo

syntax-check hits on gnulib itself

I ran 'make syntax-check' (from gnulib's maint.mk) and it detected some problems in code in gnulib itself, see: ./gl/error.c:152: wmessage = (wchar_t *) alloca (len * sizeof (wchar_t)); ./gl/vasnprintf.c:1482: buf = (TCHAR_T *) alloca (buf_neededlength * sizeof (TCHAR_T)); maint.mk: do

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

Jim Meyering wrote: > Other opinions welcome. I mostly agree with Eric here: gnulib's substitute does not guarantee that values stored in a 'bool' are either 0 or 1, therefore the code that creates 'bool' values must guarantee it. > The question is how best to *maintain* the precondition in > the

Re: syntax-check hits on gnulib itself

Simon Josefsson wrote: > Any objections to this patch? Yes, I object. Some people/projects prefer implicit conversions over explicit casts (e.g. Paul, coreutils). Some people/projects prefer explicit casts over implicit conversions (e.g. me, gettext). We've discussed this issue on this list a few

strverscmp: doc update

The gnulib documentation forgets to mention the 'strverscmp' gnulib module. Fixing it like this: 2008-09-03 Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * doc/glibc-functions/strverscmp.texi: Mention the strverscmp module. *** doc/glibc-functions/strverscmp.texi.orig2008-09-04 00:44:04.0

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Kamil Dudka wrote: > I propose a simple patch for gnulib/strverscmp, which make this function much > more useful. We cannot take this patch, as the gnulib strverscmp function is meant to be a substitute for the glibc function of the same name. (Sorry, the doc was not clear about it until today.)

Re: syntax-check hits on gnulib itself

> I ran 'make syntax-check' (from gnulib's maint.mk) and it detected some > problems in code in gnulib itself These are not problems in the code. You better avoid to apply this coding conventions checker against a file that is written with different coding conventions. Just a litt

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

Ondřej Vašík wrote: > > Does rpmvercmp have the above property? > > Similar. It separates name, epoch, version, release and architecture and > compares those. Uses subsections of alphanum segments separated by > non-alphanum chars. When same segment have different types, numeric is > always consid