On Wed 19 Jul 2006, Dave Carrigan wrote:
> Package: dirvish
> Version: 1.2.1-0.1
> Severity: normal
> Tags: patch
>
> This is not the same as
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=274943, although the
> solution to the problem is in that closed bugreport.
> --- /tmp/dirvish-expire 2006-07-19 08:59:01.000000000 -0700
> +++ /usr/sbin/dirvish-expire 2006-07-19 08:58:31.000000000 -0700
> @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@
> qw(VAULT:BRANCH IMAGE CREATED EXPIRED);
> }
>
> -for $expire (sort(imsort(@expires)))
> +for $expire (sort(imsort @expires))
> {
> my ($created, $expired);
> ($created = $$expire{created}) =~ s/:\d\d$//;
Is this a reversed patch? The distributed version of dirvish-expire has
the "for $expire (sort(imsort @expires))" line.
I'd wonder why that helps, as I use dirvish at work on 4 backup servers
which manage more than 700 vaults daily, and dirvish-expire works just
fine there. I'd like to see what determines whether it works or not...
Paul Slootman
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
