Elbert Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hoi Jim, and the rest
>
> I try to debug some things for os2 and it seems a hell of a job :(
> Espicely if you have no backgrounds about the debugger.
> But i saw newer Coreutils 6.11 i thought i try and the configuratie
> went smootly this time :P
>
> Then
Hi,
The previous version did not warn if the final record in a file was
out of order and `--check-order' was not in effect.
Thanks,
Bo
From dc34eed9e6ee34f473a8d74b98bccaf082fe79c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bo Borgerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:24:16 -0400
Subject: [PAT
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Karl Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If not, I'll be happy to do it.
>
> Please!
Here's a patch.
Bo
From 1a651ab6aedea0d0cc383f2e60c82fe7f0d395f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Bo Borgerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:24:16 -0400
Subject:
charles stringfellow wrote:
>When I type $ chmod u+x xo-get.py, I get error message: cannot access
>xo-get.py.
>Can you suggest a work around or remedy?
That message would normally be followed by the specific reason that
you "cannot access xo-get.py" such as "No such file or directory"
Coreutils maintainers,
It appears that Bison's bootstrap script is occasionally sync'ed against
Coreutils'. Paul Hilfinger, one of the Bison developers, recently made
the discovery quoted below, which I figure might also be relevant to
Coreutils.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, Joel E. Denny wrote:
> On
If not, I'll be happy to do it.
Please!
Thanks,
k
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
When I type $ chmod u+x xo-get.py, I get error message: cannot access
xo-get.py.
Can you suggest a work around or remedy?
Charles
_
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. [1]Try it
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) wrote:
> > join now verifies that the inputs are in sorted order. This check
> can
> >
> > How about doing the same for comm?
>
> Makes sense. Did you just volunteer? ;-)
If not,
Jim Meyering wrote:
> As for i18n, some students nearly took on the project of implementing a
> palatable solution recently, but that's been deferred for a few months.
Interesting... In 2001 you set out the following requirements for such
a solution:
- Processing in unibyte locales should not be
2) cp/file-perm-race.log can be reproduced like this:
terminal1$ ../../src/mkfifo fifo
terminal2$ ../../src/cp -p --copy-contents fifo fifo-copy
terminal1$ echo foo > fifo
Now on terminal2:
../../src/cp: „fifo“: No such file or directory
Looking in more detail at the "../../src/cp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) wrote:
> join now verifies that the inputs are in sorted order. This check can
>
> How about doing the same for comm?
Makes sense. Did you just volunteer? ;-)
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
h
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With coreutils-6.11 I see the same failures, plus 4 additional ones.
...
> 1) cp/parent-perm.log failed like this:
>
> + . /../umask-check
> ./parent-perm: line 27: /../umask-check: No such file or directory
Thanks!
Obviously a bug.
Fortunately, that umas
On Sunday 20 April 2008, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> On Sunday 20 April 2008, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > has work on merging Andreas' patch just stalled ?
With coreutils-6.11 I see the same failures, plus 4 additional ones.
> FAIL: help-version.log
+ FAIL: tty-eof.log
+ FAIL: help-version.log (exit: 1)
+ FAIL: ginstall
+ FAIL: tty-eof.log (exit: 1)
> FAIL: parent-perm.log
> FAIL: file-perm-race.log
> FAIL: parent-perm-race.log
> FAIL: existing-perm-
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 20 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Sunday 20 April 2008, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > has work on merging Andreas' patch just stalled ? that and the big
>> > > nasty i18n patch are about the
"Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> Putting on my sysadmin hat, I am somewhat baffled by this discussion.
> Completely hiding unknown groups?
If by "unknown" you mean nameless, that's not what the patch does.
Such a patch would not even have been considered.
_
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering recommended:
>> Can you run the tests again, but this time so that they use bash?
>> I.e., if you have installed bash in /usr/local/bin/bash, do this:
>>
>> make check PREFERABLY_POSIX_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash
>
> In 6.11, running them with
Hoi Jim, and the rest
I try to debug some things for os2 and it seems a hell of a job :(
Espicely if you have no backgrounds about the debugger.
But i saw newer Coreutils 6.11 i thought i try and the configuratie went
smootly this time :P
Then i did make and now it stops at
gcc -std=gnu99 -D_
On Apr 20, 2008, at 14:37 , Russ Allbery wrote:
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Knowing that, I expect to revert that patch -- unless someone
can come up with a very good argument for the new behavior.
Out of curiosity, how have you used it?
Usually to tell whether two shells are i
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:37:44 -0700
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > You can tell I don't use AFS and didn't do my homework.
> > I wish you'd noticed and spoken up a month or so ago.
>
> Unfortunately, I only follow the announcement list. :
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You can tell I don't use AFS and didn't do my homework.
> I wish you'd noticed and spoken up a month or so ago.
Unfortunately, I only follow the announcement list. :/
> Knowing that, I expect to revert that patch -- unless someone
> can come up with a
Jim Meyering recommended:
> Can you run the tests again, but this time so that they use bash?
> I.e., if you have installed bash in /usr/local/bin/bash, do this:
>
> make check PREFERABLY_POSIX_SHELL=/usr/local/bin/bash
In 6.11, running them with PREFERABLY_POSIX_SHELL=/bin/bash yields the same
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
...
>> BTW, those thousands of lines are remarkably similar to what you
>> reported here for MacOS X 10.5:
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/13270/focus=13273
>> minus the failures, of course. So I guess you ran t
Jim Meyering wrote:
> If security isn't enough of an argument, you can consider this yet another
> reason not to put "." early in your PATH. Please consider removing
> "." from your PATH altogether. Yes, that does make for some small amount
> of extra typing (you have to prefix certain commands w
Jim Meyering wrote:
> However, I have a big patch (nearly complete) that revamps the way tests
> are run, and I've just confirmed that with it, "make check" works fine,
> even with an abuse-inviting $PATH.
Great! Thanks.
> BTW, those thousands of lines are remarkably similar to what you
> reporte
Bob Proulx wrote:
> Bruce Korb wrote:
> > --sort=version ??? What happened?
>
> We are waiting for you to send in your copyright assignment paperwork
> before that patch can be included. Or if you did send it in then we
> are waiting for the GNU copyright clerk to process it. I sent you the
> f
Bruce Korb wrote:
> --sort=version ??? What happened?
We are waiting for you to send in your copyright assignment paperwork
before that patch can be included. Or if you did send it in then we
are waiting for the GNU copyright clerk to process it. I sent you the
forms in early February 2008. Th
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Coreutils version 6.11 has been released. This is a stable release.
>
> Since 6.10, there have been 200 change sets in coreutils proper and almost
> 300 in gnulib (most of the files in coreutils/{lib,m4} come from gnulib).
> *
> NEWS (since coreutils-6.10)
>
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After your fix in
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-02/msg00083.html
> "make check" does not fail any more when PATH contains ".", but it still
> produces a bunch of unnecessary output.
>
> Tested with coreutils-6.11 on Linux/x86:
>
>
Hi Jim,
After your fix in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-02/msg00083.html
"make check" does not fail any more when PATH contains ".", but it still
produces a bunch of unnecessary output.
Tested with coreutils-6.11 on Linux/x86:
In the tests/misc/ directory, without "." in
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Coreutils version 6.11 has been released. This is a stable release.
>> ** Improvements
>>
>> id and groups work around an AFS-related bug whereby those programs
>> would print an invalid group number, when gi
Hi,
IMHO md5sum and sha*sum are too verbose by default, especially when
checking a large collection of files with only a few failing validation.
Therefore I'd like to see an option added to suppress just the output
for successfully verified files.
The attached patch does that by adding the option
On Sunday 20 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 20 April 2008, Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > has work on merging Andreas' patch just stalled ? that and the big
> > > nasty i18n patch are about the only thing i carry in Gentoo anymore as
> > > ev
On Sunday 20 April 2008, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > has work on merging Andreas' patch just stalled ? that and the big nasty
> > i18n patch are about the only thing i carry in Gentoo anymore as
> > everything else has been merged ...
>
> I haven't looked at
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> has work on merging Andreas' patch just stalled ? that and the big nasty i18n
> patch are about the only thing i carry in Gentoo anymore as everything else
> has been merged ...
I haven't looked at any xattr-related changes for a long time.
Do you know
35 matches
Mail list logo
