Joe wrote:
> I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
> "output of shar `find port_dir`"
If your port files are stored in the subdirectory 'newport' then
you may issue the command
shar `find newport` > file.shar
This creates the 'file.shar' file, which contains a s
On 18/07/2010 10:56:42, Joe wrote:
> After getting my port ready for submitting to the ports system, I read
> the above section from the porters handbook and come to a show stopper.
>
> I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
> "output of shar `find port_dir`"
>
> Can so
Johan van Selst writes:
> Joe wrote:
>> I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
>> "output of shar `find port_dir`"
>
> If your port files are stored in the subdirectory 'newport' then
> you may issue the command
> shar `find newport` > file.shar
Another way is to
Quoth Anonymous on Sunday, 18 July 2010:
> Johan van Selst writes:
>
> > Joe wrote:
> >> I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
> >> "output of shar `find port_dir`"
> >
> > If your port files are stored in the subdirectory 'newport' then
> > you may issue the command
>
Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 18/07/2010 10:56:42, Joe wrote:
After getting my port ready for submitting to the ports system, I read
the above section from the porters handbook and come to a show stopper.
I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
"output of shar `find port_di
Quoth Joe on Monday, 19 July 2010:
> Matthew Seaman wrote:
> >On 18/07/2010 10:56:42, Joe wrote:
> >
> >>After getting my port ready for submitting to the ports system, I read
> >>the above section from the porters handbook and come to a show stopper.
> >>
> >>I can not figure out just what the aut
Chip Camden wrote:
Quoth Joe on Monday, 19 July 2010:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
On 18/07/2010 10:56:42, Joe wrote:
After getting my port ready for submitting to the ports system, I read
the above section from the porters handbook and come to a show stopper.
I can not figure out just what the aut
On 07/18/10 02:56, Joe wrote:
> I can not figure out just what the author was trying to say with
> "output of shar `find port_dir`"
I just committed what is hopefully an improvement to the documentation
for that. It should hit the web site in a couple hours.
FWIW, I saw your followup about mentio
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Joe wrote:
This needs to be in the handbook. How is anybody going to know that the
`find port_dir` is suppose to be enclosed by [`backticks`]. I has to be said
in words not just a printed example.
I would have assumed that anyone who submits a port would be familiar
with
Janne Snabb wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Joe wrote:
This needs to be in the handbook. How is anybody going to know that the
`find port_dir` is suppose to be enclosed by [`backticks`]. I has to
be said in words not just a printed example.
I would have assumed that anyone who submits a port wou
On 07/18/10 19:47, Joe wrote:
> There will always be first timers.
We all started somewhere. :)
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover!http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answ
On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:17:38 -0700
Doug Barton wrote:
> In any case, thanks for expressing your confusion, it's actually
> really helpful to get information from the perspective of a new user.
I wonder how many new users have read the bugs section of the shar man
page, and know how to check suc
RW writes:
> On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:17:38 -0700
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> In any case, thanks for expressing your confusion, it's actually
>> really helpful to get information from the perspective of a new user.
>
> I wonder how many new users have read the bugs section of the shar man
> page, and
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 18:07:14 +0400
Anonymous wrote:
> RW writes:
>
> > On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 19:17:38 -0700
> > Doug Barton wrote:
> >> In any case, thanks for expressing your confusion, it's actually
> >> really helpful to get information from the perspective of a new
> >> user.
> >
> > I wonde
RW writes:
> I don't think that's right. When I used shar to submit an update to an
> unmaintained port, I was asked to use diff for updates and shar for
> new ports.
I was referring more to [new port] PRs. Besides, diffs are natural to
any VCS unlike shars.
> Incidently shar(1) suggests run
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, RW wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks it's odd that in 2010 we're still using
executable scripts to distribute text files?
How would you do it differently?
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover!htt
Doug Barton writes:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, RW wrote:
>
>> Am I the only one that thinks it's odd that in 2010 we're still using
>> executable scripts to distribute text files?
>
> How would you do it differently?
$ diff -upNr /nonexistent mynewport
And if you have CVS checkout around
$ cd
On 2010-Jul-19 02:19:33 +, Janne Snabb wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Joe wrote:
>
>> This needs to be in the handbook. How is anybody going to know that the
>> `find port_dir` is suppose to be enclosed by [`backticks`]. I has to be said
>> in words not just a printed example.
>
>I would have a
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
(and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often
difficult to distinguish from quotes.
Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backticks)", IMO, it is
far
Doug Barton wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
(and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often
difficult to distinguish from quotes.
Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backtick
>>> The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
>>> (and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often
>>> difficult to distinguish from quotes.
>>>
>>> Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backticks)", IMO, it is
>>> far easier to write $(fi
On 21/07/2010 04:40, Joe wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>
>>> The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
>>> (and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often
>>> difficult to distinguish from quotes.
>>>
>>
On 21/07/2010, at 10:56 PM, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
> On 21/07/2010 04:40, Joe wrote:
>> Doug Barton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>>
The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
(and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) a
On 21/07/2010 15:31, Sean wrote:
>
> On 21/07/2010, at 10:56 PM, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
>
>> On 21/07/2010 04:40, Joe wrote:
>>> Doug Barton wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
> (and easily co
Sean writes:
>>> The text as its currently exists is a long way from being clear to a
>>> first timer. And I am talking about the new change that just went in.
>>>
>>> "shar `find port_dir` (note the backticks)",
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> "shar $(find port_dir)"
>>
>> This one doesn't work in (t)csh
Joe wrote:
The text as its currently exists is a long way from being clear to a
first timer. And I am talking about the new change that just went in.
"shar `find port_dir` (note the backticks)",
or
"shar $(find port_dir)"
both address the problem nicely.
By all means go and make the correct
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:00:47 -0400
Frank J. Laszlo articulated:
> I'm not trying to attack the OP, but I wanted to voice my objection for
> dumbing down the handbook to the point that a 3 year old could figure it
> out.
OK, so what age should we use for the cutoff limit? By the way, age is
an
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Jerry wrote:
Then again, perhaps we should just remove the handbook all together and
let everyone figure it out for themselves. No dumbing down at all
required. We certainly would not want to over do the 'friendly'
concept. I suppose some of use, you obviously, knew it all w
Quoth Janne Snabb on Thursday, 22 July 2010:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Jerry wrote:
>
> >Then again, perhaps we should just remove the handbook all together and
> >let everyone figure it out for themselves. No dumbing down at all
> >required. We certainly would not want to over do the 'friendly'
> >c
We don't support flamewars on FreeBSD lists, so I'm going to ask
everyone to simply stop posting on this thread.
The OP had a good point in that the PH text was not as clear as it could
be. I think I've made an improvement to it, and I'm sensitive to the
argument that $() is not portable, so w
Anonymous wrote:
> >> Am I the only one that thinks it's odd that in 2010 we're still using
> >> executable scripts to distribute text files?
> > How would you do it differently?
> $ diff -upNr /nonexistent mynewport
I quite like this solution. It's a simple command, very similar to
what's used
31 matches
Mail list logo
