Todd Vierling wrote:
> On 6/27/06, joerg@britannica.bec.de <joerg@britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> 
>>         foo-*           => foo (*)
> 
> 
>> The general problem is that even the patterns above are not exact,
>> possible best explained by (*). (*) matches foo-1.2, but also
>> foo-bar-1.2, which can not be easily reproduced. I don't think it is a
>> problem within the current tree, but still a bit nasty.
> 
> 
> This was supposed to be eliminated some time ago with the [0-9]*
> pattern changes.

My current pkglint version even warns about it, but we are still in the 
freeze for the 2006Q2 branch. :)

Roland