Your message dated Tue, 7 Jun 2005 18:05:37 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line 2.0.13 in unstable closes fixed-in-experimental bugs
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Sep 2004 14:48:21 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 15 07:48:20 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mailgate1.uni-kl.de [131.246.120.5]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1C7b52-0001Ym-00; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 07:48:20 -0700
Received: from aixs1.rhrk.uni-kl.de (aixs1.rhrk.uni-kl.de [131.246.137.3])
by mailgate1.uni-kl.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8FEmHhr001374;
Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:48:17 +0200
Received: from rotes255.wohnheim.uni-kl.de ([131.246.178.65]
helo=debian.zombie.inka.de)
by aixs1.rhrk.uni-kl.de with esmtp (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.20)
id 1C7b4y-000EM4-UX; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:48:16 +0200
Received: from inet by debian.zombie.inka.de with local (Exim 4.34)
id 1C7b4x-0008Sg-Ar; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:48:15 +0200
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:48:15 +0200
From: Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: in dpatch(1) example clean-patched should depend on unpatch
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM"
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 2.64
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040818i
Sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Package: dpatch
Version: 2.0.8
Severity: minor
Tags: patch
In the dpatch(1) manpage, you recommend to rename clean to clean-patched
and make it look this way:
clean: clean-patched unpatch
clean-patched:
...
This creates a problem if you use multiple make threads. MAKE_FLAGS with
-j would make unpatch and clean-patches run simultaneously and break the
order that you expect to achieve in the mentioned manpage. So you need
to specify .NOTPARALLEL which would kill the benefits of SMP.
OTOH you won't win much with SMP, so IMHO you should recommend setting
.NOTPARALLEL and let your examples as they currently are.
The manpage does also not have examples for the mostly existing case
where only package source is changed, not the build system.
I would rewrite the manpage like in the attached patch.
Regards,
Eduard.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8.1
Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8
-- no debconf information
--
OpenBSD fails miserably in this respect, and makes for an example of how NOT
to work with the community on security issues. Their approach is, roughly,
"we fixed this a while ago but didn't tell anyone, so you're vulnerable and
we're not, ha-ha-ha".
--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="dpatch.1.diff"
--- dpatch.1.orig 2004-09-15 16:40:00.000000000 +0200
+++ dpatch.1 2004-09-15 16:46:11.000000000 +0200
@@ -306,6 +306,11 @@
former method will be described here \- the latter has its own manual
page.
+NOTE: The following examples also require adding the ".NOTPARALLEL" flag to
the head
+of debian/rules since the dependency lists rely on the order of the
+execution. Without .NOTPARALLEL, they execution order may be wrong with
+multiple make threads (the -j option).
+
In most situations, one will want to run dpatch as soon during the
build process, as possible. How that can be accomplished depends
heavily on the existing \fIdebian/rules\fR. However, in common
@@ -315,12 +320,16 @@
only has to write a rule that calls dpatch, and add it to the list of
prerequisites for the appropriate target (see above).
-Deapplying dpatches can be a bit more tricky, since the patches might
-well affect the build system, therefore they should be deapplied after
-the source tree has been cleaned. To do this, rename the \fBclean\fR
-target to, say, \fBclean\-patched\fR, write a rule that calls dpatch
-to deapply the dpatches, and make a new \fBclean\fR rule that has
-\fBclean\-patched\fR and \fBunpatch\fR as its prerequisites.
+Deapplying dpatches can be easy or a bit more tricky. If nothing in the clean
+rule does touch the files modified by dpatches (creating incompatible changes),
+you can safely add "unpatch" to list of the clean: rule dependencies (ie.
+something like this: "clean: unpatch").
+
+If the patches might affect the build system, they should be deapplied after
+the source tree has been cleaned. To do this, rename the \fBclean\fR target to,
+say, \fBclean\-patched\fR, write a rule that calls dpatch to deapply the
+dpatches, and make a new \fBclean\fR rule that has \fBclean\-patched\fR and
+\fBunpatch\fR as its prerequisites.
Let us look at an example! First, let us look at the relevant parts of
the original \fIdebian/rules\fR of our imaginary package:
--cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 271831-done) by bugs.debian.org; 7 Jun 2005 16:05:42 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jun 07 09:05:42 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 5301d.unt0.torres.l21.ma.zugschlus.de
(torres.int.l21.ma.zugschlus.de) [217.151.83.1] (Debian-exim)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DfgaC-0000b3-00; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 09:05:40 -0700
Received: from mh by torres.int.l21.ma.zugschlus.de with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1Dfga9-0002nj-Jw; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 18:05:37 +0200
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 18:05:37 +0200
From: Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 2.0.13 in unstable closes fixed-in-experimental bugs
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 27
Hi,
dpatch 2.0.13 is now in unstable, which closes the bugs that were
fixed in experimental for 2.0.12 and 2.0.11.
Greetings
Marc
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
