Carlo Arenas [off-list ref] writes:
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 6:21 PM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
But probably better is to just amend that to call it as "test-tool libc
is-glibc-2.34-or-newer" or whatever. Then just do:
if (__GLIBC__ > 2 || (__GLIBC__ == 2 && 34 >= __GLIBC_MINOR__))
return 0;
return 1;
Yuck. Then we'd have yet another libc-is-glibc-2.36-or-newer
option, too, in the future?
Luckily that won't be needed, as this the original version (with expr)
is practically good enough even if it might be a little odd looking
and incorrect for 2.4 <= glibc <= 2.9 (which are over 10 years old).
$ expr 2.34 \<= "2.34.9000"
1
$ expr 2.34 \<= ""
0
Yeah, that is good.
What I was trying to get at was to extend Ævar's one trivially to
$ test-tool libc-is-at-or-later-than 2.34
so that we can deal with
$ test-tool libc-is-at-or-later-than 2.36
for free, but if we do not have to do anything, that is even better
;-)