On Sat, 17 Jan 1998, Robert D. Hilliard wrote: > > on a more general note, i think it would be better for my version and > > your rex version to be merged into one script. > > At first I thought this wasn't very practical, since the rex update > is messier than the bo update. I now think it would be feasible, and > will give it a try. I should post something on this soon.
ok, if i get any more bug reports on my version i'll hold off on fixing them until i get your rex version...or just forward them to you. you can release v0.12 or whatever. > > # there must be a Hilliard Conspiracy :-) > ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ > You are correct. My son Kirk is visiting me, and has his computer > setup about 5 feet from mine. :-) > I was bit (not very hard - these bugs are very gentle) by both of > these bugs. Kirk diagnosed the potential globbing problem, and > e-mailed you about it. When I found the other a little later, and > then sent you a message. > Looking back in my script files, I see that the $DEFAULT problem had > been evident every time I tested another version of the script, but I > had never noticed it. :-) yeah. when i first wrote that bit, it printed out the message while still inside the for loop. i decided that was broken and shuffled things around, but neglected to change $i to $DEFAULT. > It is interesting that you ran v0.8 on a rex system without problems. > I think that points out that the upgrade behavior of the script > depends to a great extent on which packages are installed, so there is > no guarantee that it will run error free on all systems. the machine i ran it on was somewhere between rex and bo. it was probably closer to bo than to rex, but i have no idea when it stopped being upgraded from the-unstable-that-was-to-become-bo. yes, the script is very dependant on which packages are installed. I think it will work fine on any bo installation now (it's been tested on many bo systems, and my sgrep based dependancy/conflicts checker doesn't show up any more problems) if you want, i'll give you a copy of my checker if you want to run it against a rex Packages file. it's simplistic and you can't use the output directly - it's only useful as a guide to point out things for you to look into. > I rebuilt rex from a Cheapbytes 1.2.4 CD. For test purposes, I > installed a lot of packages, especially development ones, that I don't > normally use. This may be why I have encountered more incompatible > packages than you did. probably. the rex machine i upgraded was used specifically for C and perl development. it also had X installed (but no longer needed - it got moved off someone's desk and into the server room where it belonged) craig -- craig sanders -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
