On Thu, 19 Nov 2009, Chet Ramey wrote:
> Anirban Sinha wrote:
> > Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
> >
> > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
> >
> > Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
> >
> > GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)
Isaac Good wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: i686
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
> -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
> -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='
Anirban Sinha wrote:
> Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
>
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
>
> Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
>
> GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)-release (mips64-unknown-linux-gnu)
> Copyright (C) 20
Sergei Steshenko wrote:
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > And the only way you'll know that is by reading the patch itself.
>
> No, there shouldn't be
But so it is just the same. Patches may be created in different ways
and that causes the recorded paths to either have no leading
directories, one leadin
Hmm, interesting. The patch that went in is slightly different:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash/bash-4.0-patches/bash40-019
Anyway, I have applied this patch to our copy of older bash:
GNU bash, version 3.1.0(5)-release (mips64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
an
--- On Thu, 11/19/09, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> From: Greg Wooledge
> Subject: Re: bash40-011 patch can't be applied cleanly
> To: "Sergei Steshenko"
> Cc: bug-bash@gnu.org
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2009, 5:05 AM
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 06:54:01PM
> -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
> > My s
Anirban Sinha wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> This was brought up earlier this year. Unfortunatly, the patch suggested does
> not even compile. Is there any updates on this issue? Was there an updated
> patch that is known to have worked? We are experiencing a
> very similar issue on our box.
The patch post
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 06:54:01PM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
> My script was applying patches from 'bash-4.0-patches' directory, not from
> 'bash-4.0' one, and maybe this was my mistake.
Yes. You should always be in the source directory you're patching,
when you apply a patch. The only ques
