On Thursday 18 October 2007 01:31, Michael Short wrote: > I would like to point out that there seem to be some files missing, so I > have created a new patch. I have done some work on the recent svn version > before realizing this, so I backported my changes to 5704 and created a new > diff which contains all changes since 5704 in the regress/win32/ directory > of the trunk. This diff was created in regress/win32/, so it should be > applied to that directory as well (just being verbose).
Well, I think we should figure out what went wrong with the prior patch before we work on doing another one. You sent me two patch files, and there is a small but non-zero chance that I applied the wrong one. I'm not sure why you "backported" your patch. Unless I am fixing a bug in an old version of Bacula, I *always* work on the current version of the SVN. Having a patch for a prior version of the SVN only complicates the process. > > Presumably, it would be easier just to revert regress/win32/ to rev. 5704 > and patch it. I have also copied encrypt-bug.jpg from regress/ into > regress/win32/ but the binary blob was not added to the diff. I believe the > correct syntax for patch would be "patch msbr10172007-5704.diff" (again, > verbose for clarity). If you create any new files, you must explicitly tell me, or they will not be added to the SVN. No, the above command that you provide will definitely not work. I'm sending you a copy of the file that I used to patch the SVN, and ask you to take a look at it to see if I applied the correct file or the incorrect file. Once we establish what happened, we can figure out what to do. In the future, the best way to make a patch and send it in is the following: cd <bacula-regress> svn update (make sure everything works and there are no conflicts) svn diff >xxx.patch (look at xxx.patch in READ-ONLY mode to make sure it doesn't contain any extraneous stuff). (send me xxx.patch) (indicate if there are any new files). Making the patch file any other way complicates the process of integration and leads to errors. Since I am not really sure what the base of your new patch is, I will ignore it, and we will decide whether or not to back out the old patch or to simply repatch it. By the way, in checking what the last patch did, I see that there were 16 new files that were added. If you wish, I can either add them to the SVN and commit them, or delete them. I propose to add them, then you work from the SVN including your first patch. Best regards, Kern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
