Re: uupdate and .rej files
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can't understand what the .rej files really are. > It seems to me that the corrisponding file (without .rej extensione) is > not the origianl upstream version of the file nor the previous version > one. The .rej file is the part of the patch file that didn't apply cleanly. The rest of the patch file will have been applied, so the corresponding files are partially patched, meaning part-way between original upstream and where you want them. > And also, more important, what I have to do with a .rej file ? > I guess that I have to integrate this file with the corrisponding file > but I can't understand exactly what I have to look for ... It's just a patch file fragment. Look at it, try to determine why it failed (maybe that patch is already applied or the code has moved around), work out if you still need to apply it, and if so, how. > Moreover, the package seems to work correctly even if I ignore the > existence of .rej file, is it possible ? Yes, if that patch is already applied upstream, or if the partially patched files just happen to be in a state where they work. Don't rely on it working though, you really need to check why the patches didn't apply, and make sure things are still right. -- Sam Couter | Internet Engineer | http://www.topic.com.au/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]| tSA Consulting | OpenPGP key ID: DE89C75C, available on key servers OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C pgpMHBdfFunBh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: uupdate and .rej files
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:20:19PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > As some of you told me, I try to use uupdate with new upstream release. > I know that uupdate try to apply the diff.gz patches to the new upstream > versione and when I can't do it cleanly creates a .rej file. > > I can't understand what the .rej files really are. > It seems to me that the corrisponding file (without .rej extensione) is > not the origianl upstream version of the file nor the previous version > one. > > And also, more important, what I have to do with a .rej file ? > I guess that I have to integrate this file with the corrisponding file > but I can't understand exactly what I have to look for ... > > Moreover, the package seems to work correctly even if I ignore the > existence of .rej file, is it possible ? Start by reading the patch(1) manpage. uupdate attempts to apply all of the Debian diffs to the last upstream version to the new upstream version. Those which succeed are used, those which fail are saved to the .rej file(s). If you look at the content of a .diff.gz file, you will find that it is made of a number of "hunks", something like: --- cweb-3.63.orig/cweb.1 +++ cweb-3.63/cweb.1 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.TH CWEB 1L 6/15/92 +.TH CWEB 1 6/15/92 .SH NAME ctangle, cweave \- translate CWEB to C and/or TeX .SH SYNOPSIS Thus the patch to lines 1-4 is treated as one "hunk" and is handled independently from any other diffs for this file. So you should definitely look through all of the .rej files to see why they have failed and whether or not they need to be applied to the new version in a modified way. Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/
Re: Python script
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 01:02:56PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > On 04-Apr-2001 Michael Wiedmann wrote: > > Questions which arise for me in creating an unofficial Debian > > package for a Python based script: > > > > - the upstream Python script is called 'script.py'. Should I keep > > the .py extension or drop it? > > > > Either is fine. > > > - should this script be installed in /usr/bin like any other > > regular program? > > > > as a package, yes. > > > - the upstream tarball has no man-page, so I'd created one > > and am not sure how to name it: 'script.py.1', 'script.1'? > > > > if it is foo.py, you get foo.py.1, if it is foo you get foo.1. BTW there is a > program which takes --help output and makes a manpage. I think it is called > help2man. Also note, (altough script may only be an example for you, in this case just ignore me) but script is already an existing binary of the bsdutils package (required and in base). Friendly, Sven Luther
Unidentified subject!
unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: i have a problem with making a .deb file
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:58:31PM +0200, Christian SPENER wrote:
> i made a deb file from tar.gz file, did everything like in the new maintainer
> guide. it is easy cause the programm is a kdevelop programm, so it uses
> automake conf etc.
> everything workes, only the binary goes to /bin not to /usr/bin
> when i look into into the deb file, under CONTENTS there are this dirs
> bin
> usr
> share
> ther should be only usr or?
> where can i change this? what do i have to edit, that everything goes into
> usr ??
> thx chris
>
If you used dh-make to debianize the source, or really doesn't matter
what you used, dh-make is just the 'current' way to do things. Anyway,
check your install target in debian/rules. If you are using
DH_COMPAT={2,3} then you should install to DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian/$pkg/usr, if
you have DH_COMPAT=1 use DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian/tmp/usr.
Sounds like you may be using DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian ?
HTH
Gordon Sadler
Re: uupdate and .rej files
Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can't understand what the .rej files really are. > It seems to me that the corrisponding file (without .rej extensione) is > not the origianl upstream version of the file nor the previous version > one. The .rej file is the part of the patch file that didn't apply cleanly. The rest of the patch file will have been applied, so the corresponding files are partially patched, meaning part-way between original upstream and where you want them. > And also, more important, what I have to do with a .rej file ? > I guess that I have to integrate this file with the corrisponding file > but I can't understand exactly what I have to look for ... It's just a patch file fragment. Look at it, try to determine why it failed (maybe that patch is already applied or the code has moved around), work out if you still need to apply it, and if so, how. > Moreover, the package seems to work correctly even if I ignore the > existence of .rej file, is it possible ? Yes, if that patch is already applied upstream, or if the partially patched files just happen to be in a state where they work. Don't rely on it working though, you really need to check why the patches didn't apply, and make sure things are still right. -- Sam Couter | Internet Engineer | http://www.topic.com.au/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]| tSA Consulting | OpenPGP key ID: DE89C75C, available on key servers OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C PGP signature
Re: uupdate and .rej files
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 10:20:19PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > As some of you told me, I try to use uupdate with new upstream release. > I know that uupdate try to apply the diff.gz patches to the new upstream > versione and when I can't do it cleanly creates a .rej file. > > I can't understand what the .rej files really are. > It seems to me that the corrisponding file (without .rej extensione) is > not the origianl upstream version of the file nor the previous version > one. > > And also, more important, what I have to do with a .rej file ? > I guess that I have to integrate this file with the corrisponding file > but I can't understand exactly what I have to look for ... > > Moreover, the package seems to work correctly even if I ignore the > existence of .rej file, is it possible ? Start by reading the patch(1) manpage. uupdate attempts to apply all of the Debian diffs to the last upstream version to the new upstream version. Those which succeed are used, those which fail are saved to the .rej file(s). If you look at the content of a .diff.gz file, you will find that it is made of a number of "hunks", something like: --- cweb-3.63.orig/cweb.1 +++ cweb-3.63/cweb.1 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.TH CWEB 1L 6/15/92 +.TH CWEB 1 6/15/92 .SH NAME ctangle, cweave \- translate CWEB to C and/or TeX .SH SYNOPSIS Thus the patch to lines 1-4 is treated as one "hunk" and is handled independently from any other diffs for this file. So you should definitely look through all of the .rej files to see why they have failed and whether or not they need to be applied to the new version in a modified way. Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see http://people.debian.org/~jdg Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Python script
On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 01:02:56PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > > On 04-Apr-2001 Michael Wiedmann wrote: > > Questions which arise for me in creating an unofficial Debian > > package for a Python based script: > > > > - the upstream Python script is called 'script.py'. Should I keep > > the .py extension or drop it? > > > > Either is fine. > > > - should this script be installed in /usr/bin like any other > > regular program? > > > > as a package, yes. > > > - the upstream tarball has no man-page, so I'd created one > > and am not sure how to name it: 'script.py.1', 'script.1'? > > > > if it is foo.py, you get foo.py.1, if it is foo you get foo.1. BTW there is a > program which takes --help output and makes a manpage. I think it is called > help2man. Also note, (altough script may only be an example for you, in this case just ignore me) but script is already an existing binary of the bsdutils package (required and in base). Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unidentified subject!
unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
i have a problem with making a .deb file
i made a deb file from tar.gz file, did everything like in the new maintainer guide. it is easy cause the programm is a kdevelop programm, so it uses automake conf etc. everything workes, only the binary goes to /bin not to /usr/bin when i look into into the deb file, under CONTENTS there are this dirs bin usr share ther should be only usr or? where can i change this? what do i have to edit, that everything goes into usr ?? thx chris -- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: i have a problem with making a .deb file
On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:58:31PM +0200, Christian SPENER wrote:
> i made a deb file from tar.gz file, did everything like in the new maintainer
> guide. it is easy cause the programm is a kdevelop programm, so it uses
> automake conf etc.
> everything workes, only the binary goes to /bin not to /usr/bin
> when i look into into the deb file, under CONTENTS there are this dirs
> bin
> usr
> share
> ther should be only usr or?
> where can i change this? what do i have to edit, that everything goes into
> usr ??
> thx chris
>
If you used dh-make to debianize the source, or really doesn't matter
what you used, dh-make is just the 'current' way to do things. Anyway,
check your install target in debian/rules. If you are using
DH_COMPAT={2,3} then you should install to DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian/$pkg/usr, if
you have DH_COMPAT=1 use DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian/tmp/usr.
Sounds like you may be using DESTDIR=`pwd`/debian ?
HTH
Gordon Sadler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
