On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:29:07 -0500, Jeremy Messenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 23:50:43 -0500, Joe Marcus Clarke
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm looking for people to test this small patchset for hal to look for
adverse effects. Ideally, these patches should be a big no-op for the
majority of users, but I want to make sure there are no regressions.
If you are going to test, first save the output of lshal to have a
control with which to compare. Then, apply the following diff to
sysutils/hal:
# cd /usr/ports/sysutils/hal
It should be:
# cd /usr/ports/sysutils
# patch -p < /path/to/hal.diff
# portupgrade -fOW hal
If you do notice a problem, please provide a clear problem description
and the before and after lshal outputs.
Some users may notice an improvement in the following areas:
* Discs formatted with non-ISO, non-UDF file systems are properly
detected
* Certain unsliced file systems (e.g. FAT, NTFS, etc.) are properly
detected (and mounted)
I'm not interested in general hal problems (though those _should_ be
reported). I just want confirmation that this patchset does not
introduce _new_ problems. Thanks.
http://www.marcuscom.com/downloads/hal.diff
I can test it this week when I am done w/ update my system. My system is
pretty out of date right now. I haven't update ports tree and installed
ports since GNOME 2.22 went in.
I have tested it with CD-R blank, CD-R data, DVD movie and USB flash
drive. I don't see any difference, so it works fine.
Cheers,
Mezz
Cheers,
Mezz
Joe
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD GNOME Team
http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
