Re: rsync 5.x breakage
* David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-06-18 05:32]:
On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 02:30:29PM +0200, Oliver Braun wrote:
The problem is that sed(1) on -current fails with sed -i.bak file, if
file.bak already exists, but perl does not.
Please file a PR about this.
done
Since net/rsync/Makefile
uses 3 ${REINPLACE_CMD}s on one file (rsync.h), I have removed the
backup file with ${RM} file.bak between the calls.
:-( I can see I should not have dropped maintainership of this port.
The 3 substitutions on one file were already present when I take over
maintainership.
As I have written before I am not very happy with my fix. So, if you
have a better solution, please let me know.
BTW, why have you added BUILD_DEPENDS= perl:${PORTSDIR}/lang/perl5 to
net/rsync? Only for the patches?
Regards,
Olli
--
IST IIS _ INF _ UniBwM ___ http://ist.unibw-muenchen.de/People/obraun/
Tele-Consulting GmbH ___ http://www.tele-consulting.com/ ___ obraun@
FreeBSD: The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ ___
GnuPG: 0xEF25B1BA Fingerprint: 6A3B 042A 732E 17E4 B6E7 3EAF C0B1 6B7D EF25 B1BA
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: rsync 5.x breakage
On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 10:21:32AM +0200, Oliver Braun wrote:
BTW, why have you added BUILD_DEPENDS= perl:${PORTSDIR}/lang/perl5 to
net/rsync? Only for the patches?
Correct, for the use of perl -pi -e.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: rsync 5.x breakage
[CC ports@ and current@]
* Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-06-16 13:02]:
Looks like the ${REINPLACE_CMD} patch didn't work:
http://bento.freebsd.org/errorlogs/5-latest/rsync-2.5.5_1.log
Fixed in PR ports/39365.
But I am not very happy with that fix.
The problem is that sed(1) on -current fails with sed -i.bak file, if
file.bak already exists, but perl does not. Since net/rsync/Makefile
uses 3 ${REINPLACE_CMD}s on one file (rsync.h), I have removed the
backup file with ${RM} file.bak between the calls.
== ${REINPLACE_CMD} has different semantics on -current and -stable
Maintainer only using -stable won't be able to get that error and fix it
_before_ submitting.
The extension bak has to be hardcoded in the Makefile. This is not very
sexy, and after a change of ${REINPLACE_CMD} to something like sed
-i.orig this will fail again.
So, what about changing sed(1) on -current to unify semantics of
${REINPLACE_CMD}?
Regards,
Olli
--
IST IIS _ INF _ UniBwM ___ http://ist.unibw-muenchen.de/People/obraun/
Tele-Consulting GmbH ___ http://www.tele-consulting.com/ ___ obraun@
FreeBSD: The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ ___
GnuPG: 0xEF25B1BA Fingerprint: 6A3B 042A 732E 17E4 B6E7 3EAF C0B1 6B7D EF25 B1BA
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: rsync 5.x breakage
Oliver Braun wrote:
The problem is that sed(1) on -current fails with sed -i.bak file, if
file.bak already exists, but perl does not. Since net/rsync/Makefile
uses 3 ${REINPLACE_CMD}s on one file (rsync.h), I have removed the
backup file with ${RM} file.bak between the calls.
== ${REINPLACE_CMD} has different semantics on -current and -stable
Given that we're currently discussing alternatives to REINPLACE_CMD, I
would suggest that for now, not trying to switch all the ports over to
it might be a good idea.
--
We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power.
And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory.
- George W. Bush, President of the United States
State of the Union, January 28, 2002
Do YOU Yahoo!?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: rsync 5.x breakage
* Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-06-16 20:20]:
Oliver Braun wrote:
The problem is that sed(1) on -current fails with sed -i.bak file, if
file.bak already exists, but perl does not. Since net/rsync/Makefile
uses 3 ${REINPLACE_CMD}s on one file (rsync.h), I have removed the
backup file with ${RM} file.bak between the calls.
== ${REINPLACE_CMD} has different semantics on -current and -stable
Given that we're currently discussing alternatives to REINPLACE_CMD, I
would suggest that for now, not trying to switch all the ports over to
it might be a good idea.
OK. So, I am going to suspend my work on switching the ports maintained
by ports@ to ${REINPLACE_CMD}. Or should I go on submitting patches?
Regards,
Olli
--
IST IIS _ INF _ UniBwM ___ http://ist.unibw-muenchen.de/People/obraun/
Tele-Consulting GmbH ___ http://www.tele-consulting.com/ ___ obraun@
FreeBSD: The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org/ ___
GnuPG: 0xEF25B1BA Fingerprint: 6A3B 042A 732E 17E4 B6E7 3EAF C0B1 6B7D EF25 B1BA
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
