Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on
Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:39:46 -0700:
> No need to ban 1.00; it's already banned by PMS- quoting from names.tex:
>
> A version starts with the number part, which is in the form
> \t{[0-9]+($\backslash$.[0-9]+)*} (a positive integer, followed by zero
> or more dot-prefixed positive integers).
>
> Note the 'positive integers'; so 1.00 is actually blocked by PMS. That
> said, that same text seems to invalidly ban 1.0 also.
Well, "positive integer" as used must include zero also, or by that
definition, 0.xx style versions would be disallowed as well. That just
wouldn't be sane if we're to keep anything even /close/ to upstream
version mapping, so "positive" as used here must include 0 (and does by
the literal ranged definition), and both 0.xx and x.00 are therefore
defined as allowed, unless there's a further restriction elsewhere that
hasn't been quoted.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
