From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-27006-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
	id 1IfEM0-0003PV-Mh
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:38:29 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with SMTP id l99CRkrl017050;
	Tue, 9 Oct 2007 12:27:46 GMT
Received: from mail.marples.name (rsm.demon.co.uk [80.177.111.50])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l99COifp012572
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 12:24:44 GMT
Received: from [10.73.1.31] (uberlaptop.marples.name [10.73.1.31])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.marples.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DED1190038
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue,  9 Oct 2007 12:37:36 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular texlive eclasses up for review
From: Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
In-Reply-To: <20071009131746.4fcfba57@toz.strangled.net>
References: <20071008234731.721a24e5@toz.strangled.net>
	 <20071009010317.3515901b@toz.strangled.net>
	 <1191914011.2619.7.camel@uberpc.marples.name>
	 <20071009131746.4fcfba57@toz.strangled.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Gentoo
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:00:34 +0100
Message-Id: <1191931234.7550.5.camel@uberlaptop.marples.name>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 36aecc18-1d06-4154-99a3-5cf88b755a70
X-Archives-Hash: 7b86db5376204d07ee9b8c191a046a9e

On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 13:17 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > if [ "${f/config/}" != "${f}" ]
> > Should be
> > if [ "${f#*config*}" != "${f}" ]
> 
> changed that one, the "semantics" looks better indeed; what is wanted
> here is to exclude $f containing "config". Am I missing something when
> I understand it as the exact same thing but more readable ?

The former is bash specific, the later is POSIX. Both do different
things though.

Thanks

Roy

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list