* [PATCH] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
@ 2024-12-15 20:17 Ahelenia Ziemiańska
2024-12-15 20:43 ` Alejandro Colomar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ahelenia Ziemiańska @ 2024-12-15 20:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alx; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1968 bytes --]
Compare, given:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
return strverscmp(*l, *r);
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
puts(argv[i]);
}
yields:
$ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
a-1.0a
a-1.0.1a
$ ../vers a* # as above
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
$ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
compare also the results for real data like
netstat-nat-1.{0,1{,.1},2,3.1,4{,.{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}}}.tar.gz
Thus, coreutils ls -v does NOT use strverscmp(3),
it uses a similar algorithm that actually properly sorts versions,
not just single numbers.
Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
---
man/man3/strverscmp.3 | 15 +++++----------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/man3/strverscmp.3 b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
index 41bc1ddbd..7c3643860 100644
--- a/man/man3/strverscmp.3
+++ b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
@@ -25,16 +25,7 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
orders them
.IR jan1 ", " jan10 ", ..., " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 .
.\" classical solution: "rename jan jan0 jan?"
-In order to rectify this, GNU introduced the
-.I \-v
-option to
-.BR ls (1),
-which is implemented using
-.BR versionsort (3),
-which again uses
-.BR strverscmp ().
-.P
-Thus, the task of
+The task of
.BR strverscmp ()
is to compare two strings and find the "right" order, while
.BR strcmp (3)
@@ -44,6 +35,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
.BR LC_COLLATE ,
so is meant mostly for situations
where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
+This is not actually the ordering produced by
+.BR ls (1)
+.BR -v .
+.\" because it considers a-1.0.1a < a-1.0a; this is not what you want
.P
What this function does is the following.
If both strings are equal, return 0.
--
2.39.5
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
2024-12-15 20:17 [PATCH] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v Ahelenia Ziemiańska
@ 2024-12-15 20:43 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-12-15 21:02 ` [PATCH v2] " наб
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alejandro Colomar @ 2024-12-15 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ahelenia Ziemiańska; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2790 bytes --]
Hi nab,
On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 09:17:59PM +0100, Ahelenia Ziemiańska wrote:
> Compare, given:
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
> int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
> return strverscmp(*l, *r);
> }
> int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
> qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
> for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
> puts(argv[i]);
> }
> yields:
> $ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
> a-1.0a
> a-1.0.1a
> $ ../vers a* # as above
> a-1.0.1a
> a-1.0a
> $ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
> a-1.0.1a
> a-1.0a
Should we file a bug against glibc strverscmp(3)? We probably should.
> compare also the results for real data like
> netstat-nat-1.{0,1{,.1},2,3.1,4{,.{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}}}.tar.gz
>
> Thus, coreutils ls -v does NOT use strverscmp(3),
> it uses a similar algorithm that actually properly sorts versions,
> not just single numbers.
First time I learn about ls(1) having a -v option. :|
Was people too lazy to type `ls | sort -V`?
>
> Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
> ---
> man/man3/strverscmp.3 | 15 +++++----------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man/man3/strverscmp.3 b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> index 41bc1ddbd..7c3643860 100644
> --- a/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> +++ b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> @@ -25,16 +25,7 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
> orders them
> .IR jan1 ", " jan10 ", ..., " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 .
> .\" classical solution: "rename jan jan0 jan?"
> -In order to rectify this, GNU introduced the
> -.I \-v
> -option to
> -.BR ls (1),
> -which is implemented using
> -.BR versionsort (3),
> -which again uses
> -.BR strverscmp ().
> -.P
> -Thus, the task of
> +The task of
> .BR strverscmp ()
> is to compare two strings and find the "right" order, while
> .BR strcmp (3)
> @@ -44,6 +35,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
> .BR LC_COLLATE ,
> so is meant mostly for situations
> where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
> +This is not actually the ordering produced by
> +.BR ls (1)
> +.BR -v .
> +.\" because it considers a-1.0.1a < a-1.0a; this is not what you want
I hate this reference to ls(1). ls(1) should not even have a -v option.
Please refer to sort(1) instead. I would wipe any references to file
names in this page, as I don't think they are relevant at all.
And the reference to sort(1), I'd put it in BUGS, saying that this API
is broken, and does not sort properly. Sounds good?
Have a lovely night!
Alex
> .P
> What this function does is the following.
> If both strings are equal, return 0.
> --
> 2.39.5
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
2024-12-15 20:43 ` Alejandro Colomar
@ 2024-12-15 21:02 ` наб
2024-12-15 21:44 ` Alejandro Colomar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: наб @ 2024-12-15 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alejandro Colomar; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4100 bytes --]
On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 09:43:58PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 09:17:59PM +0100, Ahelenia Ziemiańska wrote:
> > Compare, given:
> > #include <stdlib.h>
> > #include <stdio.h>
> > #include <string.h>
> > int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
> > return strverscmp(*l, *r);
> > }
> > int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
> > qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
> > for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
> > puts(argv[i]);
> > }
> > yields:
> > $ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
> > a-1.0a
> > a-1.0.1a
> > $ ../vers a* # as above
> > a-1.0.1a
> > a-1.0a
> > $ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
> > a-1.0.1a
> > a-1.0a
> Should we file a bug against glibc strverscmp(3)? We probably should.
>
> And the reference to sort(1), I'd put it in BUGS, saying that this API
> is broken, and does not sort properly. Sounds good?
No, this API works as-documented, and the implementation is useful.
It's just not what ls -v does.
> > @@ -44,6 +35,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
> > .BR LC_COLLATE ,
> > so is meant mostly for situations
> > where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
> > +This is not actually the ordering produced by
> > +.BR ls (1)
> > +.BR -v .
> > +.\" because it considers a-1.0.1a < a-1.0a; this is not what you want
> Please refer to sort(1) instead. I would wipe any references to file
> names in this page, as I don't think they are relevant at all.
Applied in scissor-patch, below
Best,
-- >8 --
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ahelenia=20Ziemia=C5=84ska?=
<nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Subject: [PATCH] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
Compare, given:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
return strverscmp(*l, *r);
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
puts(argv[i]);
}
yields:
$ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
a-1.0a
a-1.0.1a
$ ../vers a* # as above
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
$ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
compare also the results for real data like
netstat-nat-1.{0,1{,.1},2,3.1,4{,.{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}}}.tar.gz
Thus, coreutils ls -v does NOT use strverscmp(3),
it uses a similar algorithm that actually properly sorts versions,
not just single numbers.
Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
---
man/man3/strverscmp.3 | 23 ++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/man3/strverscmp.3 b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
index 41bc1ddbd..65346410c 100644
--- a/man/man3/strverscmp.3
+++ b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
@@ -18,25 +18,14 @@ .SH SYNOPSIS
.BI "int strverscmp(const char *" s1 ", const char *" s2 );
.fi
.SH DESCRIPTION
-Often one has files
+For a dataset like
.IR jan1 ", " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 ", " jan10 ", ..."
-and it feels wrong when
-.BR ls (1)
-orders them
+sorting it lexicographically yields
.IR jan1 ", " jan10 ", ..., " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 .
.\" classical solution: "rename jan jan0 jan?"
-In order to rectify this, GNU introduced the
-.I \-v
-option to
-.BR ls (1),
-which is implemented using
-.BR versionsort (3),
-which again uses
-.BR strverscmp ().
-.P
-Thus, the task of
+The task of
.BR strverscmp ()
-is to compare two strings and find the "right" order, while
+is to compare two strings yielding the former order, while
.BR strcmp (3)
finds only the lexicographic order.
This function does not use
@@ -44,6 +33,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
.BR LC_COLLATE ,
so is meant mostly for situations
where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
+This is different from the ordering produced by
+.BR sort (1)
+.BR -V .
+.\" because it considers a-1.0.1a < a-1.0a; this is not what you want
.P
What this function does is the following.
If both strings are equal, return 0.
--
2.39.5
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
2024-12-15 21:02 ` [PATCH v2] " наб
@ 2024-12-15 21:44 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-12-16 1:00 ` [PATCH v3] " наб
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alejandro Colomar @ 2024-12-15 21:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: наб; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1214 bytes --]
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:02:42PM +0100, наб wrote:
> > Should we file a bug against glibc strverscmp(3)? We probably should.
> >
> > And the reference to sort(1), I'd put it in BUGS, saying that this API
> > is broken, and does not sort properly. Sounds good?
> No, this API works as-documented, and the implementation is useful.
What does useful mean?
> It's just not what ls -v does.
While version sort isn't something standard, I think GNU should be
self-consistent.
> @@ -44,6 +33,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
> .BR LC_COLLATE ,
> so is meant mostly for situations
> where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
> +This is different from the ordering produced by
> +.BR sort (1)
> +.BR -V .
> +.\" because it considers a-1.0.1a < a-1.0a; this is not what you want
Re: "it": sort(1) -V or strverscmp(3)?
(it's the latter, I think, but don't use "it".)
Re: "this is not what you want": Who is "you"? What is "this"? And why
does "you" not want "this"?
Please clarify.
Cheers,
Alex
> .P
> What this function does is the following.
> If both strings are equal, return 0.
> --
> 2.39.5
>
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
2024-12-15 21:44 ` Alejandro Colomar
@ 2024-12-16 1:00 ` наб
2024-12-16 9:57 ` Alejandro Colomar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: наб @ 2024-12-16 1:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alejandro Colomar; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3838 bytes --]
On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:44:26PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:02:42PM +0100, наб wrote:
> > > Should we file a bug against glibc strverscmp(3)? We probably should.
> > >
> > > And the reference to sort(1), I'd put it in BUGS, saying that this API
> > > is broken, and does not sort properly. Sounds good?
> > No, this API works as-documented, and the implementation is useful.
> What does useful mean?
There are applications where a lexicographical-except-numeric comparison
like this is what you want (it's most of them). Calling it a "version
sort is silly + goofy but, whatever.
> > It's just not what ls -v does.
> While version sort isn't something standard, I think GNU should be
> self-consistent.
It is, ls -v and sort -V are consistent.
Having just implemented the /actual/ algorithm they use for voreutils,
that is by far /not/ universally applicable, much hairier, and hard-tuned for
"versions that are kinda like debian describes and sorts them (but not actually)
AND ALSO we put them in filenames where we can assume the format a little bit
AND ALSO {4 special cases to make ls -v work}".
Replacing this well-defined lexicographical-except-numeric sorter with... that,
isn't really applicable.
Best,
-- >8 --
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ahelenia=20Ziemia=C5=84ska?=
<nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Subject: [PATCH v3] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
Compare, given:
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
return strverscmp(*l, *r);
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
puts(argv[i]);
}
yields:
$ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
a-1.0a
a-1.0.1a
$ ../vers a* # as above
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
$ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
a-1.0.1a
a-1.0a
compare also the results for real data like
netstat-nat-1.{0,1{,.1},2,3.1,4{,.{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}}}.tar.gz
Thus, coreutils ls -v does NOT use strverscmp(3);
it uses a modified Debian version comparison algorithm with additional
suffix processing and ls -v-specific exceptions.
Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
---
man/man3/strverscmp.3 | 23 ++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/man3/strverscmp.3 b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
index 41bc1ddbd..e028d6788 100644
--- a/man/man3/strverscmp.3
+++ b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
@@ -18,25 +18,14 @@ .SH SYNOPSIS
.BI "int strverscmp(const char *" s1 ", const char *" s2 );
.fi
.SH DESCRIPTION
-Often one has files
+For a dataset like
.IR jan1 ", " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 ", " jan10 ", ..."
-and it feels wrong when
-.BR ls (1)
-orders them
+sorting it lexicographically yields
.IR jan1 ", " jan10 ", ..., " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 .
.\" classical solution: "rename jan jan0 jan?"
-In order to rectify this, GNU introduced the
-.I \-v
-option to
-.BR ls (1),
-which is implemented using
-.BR versionsort (3),
-which again uses
-.BR strverscmp ().
-.P
-Thus, the task of
+The task of
.BR strverscmp ()
-is to compare two strings and find the "right" order, while
+is to compare two strings yielding the former order, while
.BR strcmp (3)
finds only the lexicographic order.
This function does not use
@@ -44,6 +33,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
.BR LC_COLLATE ,
so is meant mostly for situations
where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
+This is different from the ordering produced by
+.BR sort (1)
+.BR -V .
+.\" sort -V sorts a-1.0a < a-1.0.1a; strverscmp() does not
.P
What this function does is the following.
If both strings are equal, return 0.
--
2.39.5
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
2024-12-16 1:00 ` [PATCH v3] " наб
@ 2024-12-16 9:57 ` Alejandro Colomar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alejandro Colomar @ 2024-12-16 9:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: наб; +Cc: linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4318 bytes --]
Hi nab,
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 02:00:45AM +0100, наб wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:44:26PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 10:02:42PM +0100, наб wrote:
> > > > Should we file a bug against glibc strverscmp(3)? We probably should.
> > > >
> > > > And the reference to sort(1), I'd put it in BUGS, saying that this API
> > > > is broken, and does not sort properly. Sounds good?
> > > No, this API works as-documented, and the implementation is useful.
> > What does useful mean?
> There are applications where a lexicographical-except-numeric comparison
> like this is what you want (it's most of them). Calling it a "version
> sort is silly + goofy but, whatever.
Hmmm, yeah, we can live with that for historical raisins.
> > > It's just not what ls -v does.
> > While version sort isn't something standard, I think GNU should be
> > self-consistent.
> It is, ls -v and sort -V are consistent.
> Having just implemented the /actual/ algorithm they use for voreutils,
> that is by far /not/ universally applicable, much hairier, and hard-tuned for
> "versions that are kinda like debian describes and sorts them (but not actually)
> AND ALSO we put them in filenames where we can assume the format a little bit
> AND ALSO {4 special cases to make ls -v work}".
> Replacing this well-defined lexicographical-except-numeric sorter with... that,
> isn't really applicable.
Sounds reasonable.
>
> Best,
> -- >8 --
> From: =?UTF-8?q?Ahelenia=20Ziemia=C5=84ska?=
> <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
> Subject: [PATCH v3] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v
>
> Compare, given:
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <string.h>
> int compar(const char **l, const char **r) {
> return strverscmp(*l, *r);
> }
> int main(int argc, char ** argv) {
> qsort(argv + 1, argc - 1, sizeof(*argv), compar);
> for(int i = 1; i < argc; ++i)
> puts(argv[i]);
> }
> yields:
> $ /bin/ls -v1 a* # coreutils ls
> a-1.0a
> a-1.0.1a
> $ ../vers a* # as above
> a-1.0.1a
> a-1.0a
> $ ls -v1 a* # voreutils ls @ 5781698 with strverscmp()-equivalent sorting
> a-1.0.1a
> a-1.0a
> compare also the results for real data like
> netstat-nat-1.{0,1{,.1},2,3.1,4{,.{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}}}.tar.gz
>
> Thus, coreutils ls -v does NOT use strverscmp(3);
> it uses a modified Debian version comparison algorithm with additional
> suffix processing and ls -v-specific exceptions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Patch applied. Thanks!
Have a lovely day!
Alex
> ---
> man/man3/strverscmp.3 | 23 ++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man/man3/strverscmp.3 b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> index 41bc1ddbd..e028d6788 100644
> --- a/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> +++ b/man/man3/strverscmp.3
> @@ -18,25 +18,14 @@ .SH SYNOPSIS
> .BI "int strverscmp(const char *" s1 ", const char *" s2 );
> .fi
> .SH DESCRIPTION
> -Often one has files
> +For a dataset like
> .IR jan1 ", " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 ", " jan10 ", ..."
> -and it feels wrong when
> -.BR ls (1)
> -orders them
> +sorting it lexicographically yields
> .IR jan1 ", " jan10 ", ..., " jan2 ", ..., " jan9 .
> .\" classical solution: "rename jan jan0 jan?"
> -In order to rectify this, GNU introduced the
> -.I \-v
> -option to
> -.BR ls (1),
> -which is implemented using
> -.BR versionsort (3),
> -which again uses
> -.BR strverscmp ().
> -.P
> -Thus, the task of
> +The task of
> .BR strverscmp ()
> -is to compare two strings and find the "right" order, while
> +is to compare two strings yielding the former order, while
> .BR strcmp (3)
> finds only the lexicographic order.
> This function does not use
> @@ -44,6 +33,10 @@ .SH DESCRIPTION
> .BR LC_COLLATE ,
> so is meant mostly for situations
> where the strings are expected to be in ASCII.
> +This is different from the ordering produced by
> +.BR sort (1)
> +.BR -V .
> +.\" sort -V sorts a-1.0a < a-1.0.1a; strverscmp() does not
> .P
> What this function does is the following.
> If both strings are equal, return 0.
> --
> 2.39.5
>
--
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-12-16 9:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-12-15 20:17 [PATCH] strverscmp.3: this is NOT the ordering used by ls -v Ahelenia Ziemiańska
2024-12-15 20:43 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-12-15 21:02 ` [PATCH v2] " наб
2024-12-15 21:44 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-12-16 1:00 ` [PATCH v3] " наб
2024-12-16 9:57 ` Alejandro Colomar
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox