Re: Long-pending patch for Stratus VOS build
I think the below patch is the cause of the failure of the Irix 6.5 type on build.samba.org, because it is complaining about line 73 of the Makefile which at least on my Linux machine is rsync$(EXEEXT): $(OBJS) It might be easiest for somebody who has an Irix machine that they can use to debug this further. - Dave On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 01:49:37PM -0600, Dave Dykstra wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 11:33:00AM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 01:23:45PM -0500, Green, Paul wrote: The following patch still applies cleanly to the current cvs copy of rsync. Or did before the most recent Makefile.in changes. It's easy to merge this one problem, though. Does anyone object to having these changes applied now, during the pre-release phase? Here are my comments on the changes: + The Makefile.in changes look very safe and needed. + The install-sh change to the dsttmp value looks good. ? I have a question about the portability of the u_FOO - uFOO_t changes. The former is the BSD syntax for the unsigned FOO typedefs, and the latter is what, POSIX? The changes work on Linux, at least. Perhaps we should just make these changes and try it out on the compile farm. + The inet_pton changes look right to make the code consistent. The only possible glitch might be a system that has a prototype for inet_pton() but not the library code -- if the prototype conflicts, the compile would fail (there are ways to work around this, but let's worry about that if we actually find some weird system with this problem). I'd be glad to check in the + changes now if Dave thinks now is a good time. Ok, go ahead. I think it's ok to try out the ? patch on the compile farm too. I know that Cygwin also uses $(EXEEXT), but apparently its make has been more thoroughly modified to handle things automatically so the Makefile doesn't have to use it as much. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Long-pending patch for Stratus VOS build
The following patch still applies cleanly to the current cvs copy of rsync. I apply it each night after I grab rsync from the build farm. Without it, I don't get far at all. The purpose of the patch is to add executable extension handling, which we need, and to clean up a few POSIX things and supply defaults for a few #defines we don't have. (See the original letter for full details). Does anyone object to having these changes applied now, during the pre-release phase? http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/rsync/2002-November/008937.html Thanks PG -- Paul Green, Senior Technical Consultant, Stratus Technologies. Voice: +1 978-461-7557; FAX: +1 978-461-3610; Video on request. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Long-pending patch for Stratus VOS build
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 01:23:45PM -0500, Green, Paul wrote: The following patch still applies cleanly to the current cvs copy of rsync. Or did before the most recent Makefile.in changes. It's easy to merge this one problem, though. Does anyone object to having these changes applied now, during the pre-release phase? Here are my comments on the changes: + The Makefile.in changes look very safe and needed. + The install-sh change to the dsttmp value looks good. ? I have a question about the portability of the u_FOO - uFOO_t changes. The former is the BSD syntax for the unsigned FOO typedefs, and the latter is what, POSIX? The changes work on Linux, at least. Perhaps we should just make these changes and try it out on the compile farm. + The inet_pton changes look right to make the code consistent. The only possible glitch might be a system that has a prototype for inet_pton() but not the library code -- if the prototype conflicts, the compile would fail (there are ways to work around this, but let's worry about that if we actually find some weird system with this problem). I'd be glad to check in the + changes now if Dave thinks now is a good time. ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Long-pending patch for Stratus VOS build
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 11:33:00AM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 01:23:45PM -0500, Green, Paul wrote: The following patch still applies cleanly to the current cvs copy of rsync. Or did before the most recent Makefile.in changes. It's easy to merge this one problem, though. Does anyone object to having these changes applied now, during the pre-release phase? Here are my comments on the changes: + The Makefile.in changes look very safe and needed. + The install-sh change to the dsttmp value looks good. ? I have a question about the portability of the u_FOO - uFOO_t changes. The former is the BSD syntax for the unsigned FOO typedefs, and the latter is what, POSIX? The changes work on Linux, at least. Perhaps we should just make these changes and try it out on the compile farm. + The inet_pton changes look right to make the code consistent. The only possible glitch might be a system that has a prototype for inet_pton() but not the library code -- if the prototype conflicts, the compile would fail (there are ways to work around this, but let's worry about that if we actually find some weird system with this problem). I'd be glad to check in the + changes now if Dave thinks now is a good time. Ok, go ahead. I think it's ok to try out the ? patch on the compile farm too. I know that Cygwin also uses $(EXEEXT), but apparently its make has been more thoroughly modified to handle things automatically so the Makefile doesn't have to use it as much. I'm looking at the --copy-unsafe-links problem and it looks very badly broken. I was the one who put it in the first place based on a contributed patch, and now I'm not sure it ever worked. It's going to take a while to trace through the history to figure out if it worked once and if so when it broke. The fix is not likely to impact much, though, so I don't think 2.5.6pre1 will need to be held up because of it because it can go in later. - Dave -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
RE: Long-pending patch for Stratus VOS build
Wayne Davison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Here are my comments on the changes: ? I have a question about the portability of the u_FOO - uFOO_t changes. The former is the BSD syntax for the unsigned FOO typedefs, and the latter is what, POSIX? The changes work on Linux, at least. Perhaps we should just make these changes and try it out on the compile farm. Yes, uFOO_t is POSIX, 1990, IIRC. Thanks! PG -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
