Does a requirement that third time offenders placed on probation "be confined in county jail" need to be satisfied by placement in a functional equivalent of an alcohol rehabilitation facility?

Defendant urges that the requirement that third time offenders placed on probation "be confined in county jail" is satisfied by placement in the "functional equivalent" of an alcohol rehabilitation facility. Thus, he urges that the phrase "county jail" should not be construed literally but rather by reference to other statutes in which the term appears. He relies on the case of People v. Sylvestry (1980) 112 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 169 Cal.Rptr. 575, to support this contention.