Stuart Henderson wrote: Hello Stuart, > On 2010/01/12 21:55, Stephan Tesch wrote: > >> Stuart Henderson schrieb: >> >> Hello Stuart, >> >> Doesn't seem to work here: >> >> Freshly pulled cvs source for ports brings the following: >> > > I guess it got mangled on the way to your MUA; it works > for me pulling it out of marc.info's archive: > > <st...@zoo:/tmp:2>$ acvs -q get -P -d sa ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin > U sa/Makefile > U sa/distinfo > U sa/files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html > U sa/patches/patch-Makefile_PL > U sa/patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf > U sa/patches/patch-sa-update_raw > U sa/pkg/DESCR > U sa/pkg/PLIST > <st...@zoo:/tmp:3>$ cd sa > <st...@zoo:/tmp:4>$ ftp -o- > 'http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=126332727021192&q=raw' | patch -p0 -E > Trying 63.238.77.172... > Requesting http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=126332727021192&q=raw > 39065 bytes received in 0.43 seconds (88.19 KB/s) > Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |SpamAssassin users, here's an update to the unofficial 3.3.0-rc2. > |The final 3.3.0 release should be along quite soon (maybe Friday). > |Please test and report any problems asap. beta1/rc1 have been > |working well for me with MailScanner. > | > |Note if you're upgrading: > | > |- FreeMail, PhishTag and Reuse are now included in the main > |SA distribution, remove any external copies > | > |- The AWL plugin is no longer loaded by default, you must load it > |explicitly should you want to use it. > | > | > |Index: Makefile > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /cvs/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/Makefile,v > |retrieving revision 1.59 > |diff -u -p -r1.59 Makefile > |--- Makefile 1 Jan 2010 22:41:15 -0000 1.59 > |+++ Makefile 12 Jan 2010 19:45:37 -0000 > -------------------------- > Patching file Makefile using Plan A... > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1. > Hunk #2 succeeded at 27. > Hunk #3 succeeded at 72. > Hunk #4 succeeded at 80. > Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: distinfo > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: /cvs/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/distinfo,v > |retrieving revision 1.34 > |diff -u -p -r1.34 distinfo > |--- distinfo 4 Sep 2008 06:42:12 -0000 1.34 > |+++ distinfo 12 Jan 2010 19:45:37 -0000 > -------------------------- > Patching file distinfo using Plan A... > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1. > Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: > /cvs/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html,v > |retrieving revision 1.9 > |diff -u -p -r1.9 OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html > |--- files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html 21 Oct 2006 19:26:14 > -0000 1.9 > |+++ files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html 12 Jan 2010 19:45:37 > -0000 > -------------------------- > Patching file files/OpenBSD-SpamAssassin-mini-howto.html using Plan A... > Hunk #1 succeeded at 6. > Hunk #2 succeeded at 33. > Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: patches/patch-Makefile_PL > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: > /cvs/ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin/patches/patch-Makefile_PL,v > |retrieving revision 1.10 > |diff -u -p -r1.10 patch-Makefile_PL > |--- patches/patch-Makefile_PL 23 Oct 2009 10:26:18 -0000 1.10 > |+++ patches/patch-Makefile_PL 12 Jan 2010 19:45:37 -0000 > -------------------------- > Patching file patches/patch-Makefile_PL using Plan A... > Hunk #1 succeeded at 1. > Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me... > The text leading up to this was: > -------------------------- > |Index: patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf > |=================================================================== > |RCS file: patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf > |diff -N patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf > |--- patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf 1 Jan 2010 22:41:15 -0000 > 1.1 > |+++ /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000 > -------------------------- > Patching file patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf using Plan A... > Empty context always matches. > Hunk #1 failed at 0. > 1 out of 1 hunks failed--saving rejects to > patches/patch-rules_72_active_cf.rej > Does it really? This doesn't look right to me?!
Regards, Stephan
