Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

CLA Missing

Our records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA:

@Roffild

For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day
before our records are updated.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

Every change to Python requires a NEWS entry.

Please, add it using the blurb_it Web app or the blurb command-line tool.

Github is not set up. Only after "Update - Rebase" did the bot call the reviewer. For other projects, this button is not available to me.

Hi, I'm not a bot :) I'm a very human triager.

But @cpython-cla-bot - bot 😄

But @cpython-cla-bot - bot 😄

That's just because they're the new bot on the block! They didn't exist when you first filed the PR (and nor did Bedevere's "please add a NEWS entry" functionality), but now they do, so adding new commits to your branch triggered them.

The current behavior is correct:

>>> fnmatch.fnmatch('/bin/busybox', 'busybox')
False
>>> fnmatch.fnmatch('busybox', 'busybox')
True
>>> fnmatch.fnmatch('/bin/busybox', '*busybox')  # note the *
True

The problem is not with the end of the string, but with the beginning:

• 'busybox' only matches busybox and not /bin/busybox or other strings containing busybox
• '*busybox' matches strings that end with busybox, including /bin/busybox
• 'busybox*' matches strings that begin with busybox

Concur with @ezio-melotti.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <fnmatch.h>
int main() {
   printf("%d=False %d=True %d=True\n",
      fnmatch("/bin/busybox", "busybox", 0),
      fnmatch("busybox", "busybox", 0),
      fnmatch("/bin/busybox", "*busybox", 0)
      );
}
// 1=False 0=True 1=True

https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/fnmatch.3.html and GCC

re.search:

fnmatch.fnmatch('/bin/busybox', 'busybox')
Out[2]: True
fnmatch.fnmatch('busybox', 'busybox')
Out[3]: True
fnmatch.fnmatch('/bin/busybox', '*busybox')
Out[4]: True

My version meets the standard for option 1.

You are confused by the fact that the C's fnmatch and the Python's fnmatch have different order of parameters.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <fnmatch.h>

int main()
{
    printf("1st=%d 2nd=%d 3rd=%d\n",
        fnmatch("busybox", "/bin/busybox", 0),
        fnmatch("busybox", "busybox", 0),
        fnmatch("*busybox", "/bin/busybox", 0)
    );
    return 0;
}

Outputs 1st=1 2nd=0 3rd=0. Note two things, from the fnmatch manpage:

• The signature of the C function is int fnmatch(const char *pattern, const char *string, int flags); (the pattern first, then the string).
• Zero if string matches pattern, FNM_NOMATCH if there is no match or another nonzero value if there is an error.

This means that the first example didn't match, whereas the other two did, so it's consistent with Python's behavior and the example I posted above.

But

fnmatch("busybox", "/bin/busybox", 0) != fnmatch.fnmatch('/bin/busybox', 'busybox')

It was this pattern that made me create the patch.
The \Z in '(?s:busybox)\\Z' clearly hints at this behavior. And about ignoring \Z and $ in re.match, there are many posts in SO.

Please read more carefully what @ezio-melotti has written above.