2011/1/25 Jeff Johnson <n3...@mac.com>:
>
> On Jan 25, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote:
>
>> grf, sent this one earlier with wrong alias..
>> 2011/1/25 Per Øyvind Karlsen <peroyv...@mandriva.org>:
>>> 2011/1/24 Jeff Johnson <n3...@mac.com>:
>>>> Lessess if we can get this "fixed".
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 8:39 PM, Per Øyvind Karlsen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To make dbiFindMatches() to match -%{disttag}%{distepoch}, I changed
>>>>>>> _post_NVRA to:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> static const char _post_NVRA[] =
>>>>>>> "(-[^-]+-[^-]+-[^-]+\\.[^.]+|-[^-]+-[^-]+\\.[^.]+|-[^-]+\\.[^.]+|\\.[^.]+|)$";
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This expression gets too greedy for packages with '-' in the name and
>>>>>>> without disttag/distepoch though..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is something I don't understand here.
>>>>
>>>> Let's say a NVRA key looks like this
>>>>
>>>> foo-1.2-3mdv2011.0.noarch
>>>>
>>>> That might be a {N,V,R,A} 4-tuple, or that might be a {N,V,R,D,A} 5- or
>>>> 6-tuple.
>>>>
>>>> Either way the string is identical, and the existing _post_NVRA pattern
>>>> either "works" or doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> So where is this "too greedy" coming from? My guess is that you have
>>>> mixtures of strings in the NVRA index, some with "mdv2011.0", some without.
>>> Yupp, that's just it.
>
> No, there's _STILL_ something I'm missing.
>
> Concatenated strings -- with or without Distepoch: --
> will "work" without any change.
>
> Can you supply an example where the existing implementation
> is "too greedy" for some input pattern applied to some set of strings?
ie:
rpm-build-1-1.x86_64
version: build, release: 1
vs
rpm-build-1-1mdv2011.0.x86_64
version: 1, release: 1
--
Regards,
Per Øyvind
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
