Matt Kraai <kraai@ftbfs.org> (21/11/2005): > On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 04:08:03PM +0100, Thomas Huriaux wrote: > > In a few months, the DSAs will have four digits. With the current > > sorting method (lexically), we will have the following sorting scheme: > > dsa-1000 dsa-1001 dsa-998 dsa-999 > > Can somebody confirm that there is no problem if I apply the attached > > patch? (it sorts numerically instead of lexically). > > In my quick testing, > > "dsa-1001" <=> "dsa-999" > > returns 0, not 1. Doesn't this cause your patch to break? Indeed, it does not give at all the expected results (I don't know exactly why I got what I wanted the first time I tried). Please have a look at the attached patch, it seems to work better but it is a little bit hackish. Cheers, -- Thomas Huriaux
Index: recent_list.wml
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/webwml/webwml/english/template/debian/recent_list.wml,v
retrieving revision 1.130
diff -u -r1.130 recent_list.wml
--- recent_list.wml 15 Sep 2005 11:19:17 -0000 1.130
+++ recent_list.wml 2 Dec 2005 11:58:01 -0000
@@ -183,7 +183,9 @@
@files = ( @files, @new_files );
}
- @files = sort {$a cmp $b} @files;
+ @files = sort {
+ ($a =~ /dsa-(\d+)/)[0] <=> ($b =~ /dsa-(\d+)/)[0] || $a cmp $b
+ } @files;
#warn "files: " . join " ", @files; warn "\n";
#warn "years: " . join " ", @years; warn "\n";
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature