Re: [Clamav-devel] PATCH: improvements for Mac OS X/clamXav

2004-10-11 Thread Mark Allan 
D'oh!  I didn't realise .80rc4 was out.  I wrote that email a couple of 
days ago and only just got round to sending it!

Sorry.
On 11 Oct 2004, at 11:35 pm, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:32:12 +0100
Mark Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi guys,
With the release of 8.0 imminent, can I ask again why the OS X
resource fork patch has not made it in yet?
We know it works, so I'm a bit confused.  I don't mean to moan, I'm
just surprised not to see it accepted yet.
The change has been included in 0.80rc4.
--
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Tue Oct 12 00:35:00 CEST 2004
___
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-devel
___
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-devel

Re: [Clamav-devel] PATCH: improvements for Mac OS X/clamXav

2004-10-11 Thread Tomasz Kojm 
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:32:12 +0100
Mark Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi guys,
> 
> With the release of 8.0 imminent, can I ask again why the OS X
> resource fork patch has not made it in yet?
> 
> We know it works, so I'm a bit confused.  I don't mean to moan, I'm 
> just surprised not to see it accepted yet.

The change has been included in 0.80rc4.

-- 
   oo. Tomasz Kojm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  (\/)\. http://www.ClamAV.net/gpg/tkojm.gpg
 \..._ 0DCA5A08407D5288279DB43454822DC8985A444B
   //\   /\  Tue Oct 12 00:35:00 CEST 2004


pgpGcEooegqEN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-devel

Re: [Clamav-devel] PATCH: improvements for Mac OS X/clamXav

2004-10-11 Thread Mark Allan 
Hi guys,
With the release of 8.0 imminent, can I ask again why the OS X resource 
fork patch has not made it in yet?

We know it works, so I'm a bit confused.  I don't mean to moan, I'm 
just surprised not to see it accepted yet.

Thanks
Mark
On 1 Oct 2004, at 1:40 am, Remi Mommsen wrote:
On Sep 30, 2004, at 5:32 PM, Tomasz Kojm wrote:
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:10:24 -0700
Remi Mommsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+
+#ifdef __APPLE_CC__
+/* On Mac OS X use ditto and copy resource fork, too. */
+char *ditto = (char *) mcalloc(strlen(src) + strlen(dest) + 30,
sizeof(char));
+sprintf(ditto,"/usr/bin/ditto --rsrc %s %s",src,dest);
+if( system(ditto) ) {
+  mprintf("");   // dummy statement to work around gcc optimizer
bug
+  return -1;
+}
Don't forget to free(ditto)! BTW: Is the dummy statement really 
needed?
Right, stupid mistake. Can you (or whoever will eventually commit the 
patch) add it, please?

The dummy statement is unfortunately needed. Maybe it will be solved 
by one of the next gcc versions, but Xtools 1.3 and 1.5 both optimize 
it such that 'if( system(ditto) )' always evaluates to true, i.e. the 
copy fails. I guess I should submit a bug report, but haven't had time 
yet )-;

Cheers,
Remi
___
http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-devel