r1211582 should make things better. I think the nightly releases were also affected by this bug, in which case tonight's nightly roll should confirm the fix.
http://subversion.apache.org/source-code.html#nightlies On Wed, Dec 7, 2011, at 19:56, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011, at 19:53, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011, at 11:43, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 11:23:30AM -0400, Shane Turner wrote: > > > >> Should I open a bug report to have the packages regenerated, > > > > > > > > No. Releases are never regenerated. That would invalidate signatures > > > > developers sent for the release.[*] > > > > > > > > We'll have to figure out the source of the problem and then try > > > > to avoid it in future releases. > > > > > > It may be related to the sed problem we were having in the 1.7 RC > > > series. Apparently one of scripts relied upon GNU sed which wasn't > > > installed on people.apache.org. I had been using a custom install of > > > it, but I thought Daniel had fixed the offending script to not require > > > GNU sed. 1.7.2 represents the first release in which I relied upon > > > the system sed, and not my custom one. > > > > > > > r1159741 > > > > However, SVN_VER_REVISION on the 1.7.2 tag is wrong. > > ... but SVN_VER_TAG, which incorporates the revnum, is right. > > Hmm. >
