[PATCH] tests: fix the install/strip-program test

I noticed a test failure on OpenBSD 3.9. It was due to a bug that would probably cause trouble on other systems, too. Here's the fix: >From fbc5aa7c47597694d8973a134143a2281748eec6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 17:12:08 +0200 Subject: [PATCH

Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-6.12.208-2441

Hoi, Jim Meyering wrote: Elbert Pol<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Jim, Thank you! You've just uncovered a bug! Fixed by the patch below. However, that problem is independent of the libgmp issue, so if you apply the patch, your build should get farther. Actually, there's another: after a

Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as AM_PROG_LIBTOOL

"Debarshi Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Subject: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as >> AM_PROG_LIBTOOL > > Wow! Thanks a lot. Will this make its way into build-aux/bootstrap of > Gnulib as well? That *was* for gnulib. I'm Cc'ing the right list this time. >> * build-aux/

Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-6.12.208-2441

Elbert Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... >> What version of Perl are you using? >> Run perl -v >> >> Then try this patch: >> >> diff --git a/man/help2man b/man/help2man >> index cbdaf06..911edc9 100755 >> --- a/man/help2man >> +++ b/man/help2man >> @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ BEGIN { >> >> unless ($ha

Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as AM_PROG_LIBTOOL

* Jim Meyering wrote on Sun, Oct 05, 2008 at 01:01:14PM CEST: > "Debarshi Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Subject: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as > >> AM_PROG_LIBTOOL > >> * build-aux/bootstrap: Check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, as well as the > >> obsolete AM_PROG_LIBTOOL.

Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as AM_PROG_LIBTOOL

> Subject: [PATCH] bootstrap: check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL as well as > AM_PROG_LIBTOOL Wow! Thanks a lot. Will this make its way into build-aux/bootstrap of Gnulib as well? > * build-aux/bootstrap: Check for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, as well as the > obsolete AM_PROG_LIBTOOL. > Spotted by Debarshi 'Rishi'

Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-6.12.208-2441

Hoi, Jim Meyering wrote: Elbert Pol<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... What version of Perl are you using? Run perl -v Then try this patch: diff --git a/man/help2man b/man/help2man index cbdaf06..911edc9 100755 --- a/man/help2man +++ b/man/help2man @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ BEGIN { unless ($have_

Re: tee logs no output if stdout is closed

Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> > You can distinguish close_stream and close_stdout. close_stream is library >> > code, >> > close_stdout is not. What about a 'bool ignore_epipe' that influences the >> > behaviour of close_stdout? Whereas the library code that cal

Re: cp -u should skip copying a file to itself

Ed Avis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > % touch foo foo > % cp -u foo foo && echo yes > cp: `foo' and `foo' are the same file > > I expected that since -u says > >-u, --update > copy only when the SOURCE file is newer than the > destination file or when the destinat

Re: Patch to check for required programs when building from source checkout

Ed Avis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A few tools are required to build coreutils from a git checkout, but > not checked in a friendly way. This patch adds checks to bootstrap > and configure. > > Oh, and updates automake to 1.10.1, which appears to work. Hi Ed, Thanks for working on this. Appea

[PATCH] avoid use of undefined variable in warning

* tests/CuTmpdir.pm (chmod_tree): Do not warn if $dir is undefined. --- Hi Jim, I'm currently debugging my parallel Automake TESTS pending patch using coreutils' test suite. This turned up as side issue; I haven't seen this show up otherwise. I'll post patches when I get the bugs that I see iro

coreutils-7.0 released (beta)

Coreutils version 7.0 has been released. Considering the two new programs, and that several of the existing programs acquired new options or other non-trivial improvements, this qualifies as a feature release and gets the "beta" label. However, most changes have been local and well-tested. For a

Re: Patch to fix data loss with `tail -F' (bug 6612)

I see that coreutils-7.0 has been released without this change. To recap, I don't think I'm able to provide a more satisfactory patch. Is the consensus that I should just continue to apply my patch locally? That works for me; after all, it does fix my problem, introduces no known regressions that

Re: tee logs no output if stdout is closed

Jim Meyering wrote: > Thanks for writing all that. The code looks fine. Glad to see that our disagreements have been reduced to the comments. > Let's not use "signaled" here. Yes, indeed this term is confusing in a paragraph dealing with signals. > How about this in place of the above: > > /

Re: tee logs no output if stdout is closed

After the newest changes to gnulib, here's a revised version of the patch proposed in From a4434d71a1a3ec7a6aee6de4a81da36301b12a28 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 02:58:5

Re: Patch to fix data loss with `tail -F' (bug 6612)

Jos Backus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see that coreutils-7.0 has been released without this change. > > To recap, I don't think I'm able to provide a more satisfactory patch. Is the > consensus that I should just continue to apply my patch locally? That works > for me; after all, it does fix m

Re: Patch to fix data loss with `tail -F' (bug 6612)

On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 07:14:02AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > Sorry it couldn't make it into 7.0. No need to apologize, Jim. I'm just glad to know this will be fixed - thanks again for working on this. I do apologize for not being able to provide a better patch. > The change I have in mind isn'