Re: New stable snapshot

"Michel Boaventura" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Today I've tried to compile the last snapshot, to see if the patch > works, and I've got a new error: > > close.c:30:21: w32sock.h: No such file or directory [...] > The file w32sock.h should be supplied by the pspp package, or by mingw? By gnulib

Re: gnulib and distros

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Sylvain Beucler on 11/4/2008 12:29 PM: > Just to know, what do you think about it? A recipe for disaster. > Afaics the Debian 'gnulib' > package is refreshed monthly with a git checkout dated "this month's > 1st day at 00:00". Insuffici

Re: parse_duration()

Bruno Haible wrote: For this context, the right, proper and easiest solution is to say that months are 30 days and leave it at that. But it should be documented. In the new .h file. It is much more forgiving than the ISO-8601 spec. It doesn't worry about counts being lower than the conta

Re: Gauge interest in an XDR implementation

Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > I'd like to know whether Gnulib developers would be interested in > > taking on an XDR implementation (based on the one in glibc)? Yes, this definitely can have its place in gnulib, because it is glibc functionality that is not present on all other systems. You can l

Re: fdl-1.3

Karl Berry wrote: > I was surprised to see the "1.2" used in so many places. The Emacs > manual, for example, has this in subfiles: > > @c This is part of the Emacs manual. > @c Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2000, > @c 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 20

Re: gnulib and distros

Sylvain Beucler wrote: > Afaics the Debian 'gnulib' > package is refreshed monthly with a git checkout dated "this month's > 1st day at 00:00". Since gnulib is a 'no release' project I'm not sure > about it. Usually I perform some testing of my copy of gnulib and I > refresh it only after a release

Re: [PATCH] random_r: new module

Jim Meyering wrote: > I've been using config/srclist.txt, but if this annotation > might help you, you're welcome to add it. Thanks. Done. Bruno

Re: fdl-1.3

true for getdate.texi: the file is added to packages via the getdate Getdate is a special case. It is one of the very very few .texi files that is actually used in multiple manuals. That is, I'm not aware of any other manuals that use alloca*, etc., and given the content, I can't really pict

Re: fdl-1.3

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > I was surprised to see the "1.2" used in so many places. The Emacs > manual, for example, has this in subfiles: > > @c This is part of the Emacs manual. > @c Copyright (C) 1985, 1986, 1987, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2000, > @c 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004,

Re: missing gnu-oids.texi

I applied this small fix because gnu-oids.texi appears to be included by standards.texi and not maintain.texi. Oh yeah, I changed my mind midstream about where to put it. I'll make the same change in gnustandards. Thanks.

Re: fdl-1.3

so I have pushed the patch below. Thanks. Not that I'm the copyright holder either. doc/alloca-opt.texi |2 +- doc/alloca.texi |2 +- doc/c-ctype.texi|2 +- ... I was surprised to see the "1.2" used in so many places. The Emacs m

Re: missing gnu-oids.texi

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > Since commit 7c0e989 on Saturday, standards.texi now fails to build, > because you did not add the file gnu-oids.texi to gnulib. > > Sorry, I added it now. I applied this small fix because gnu-oids.texi appears to be included by standards.texi and

Re: fdl-1.3

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > > Subject: [PATCH] Add GFDLv1.3. > Will standards.texi be swapped to use this new license? > > I presume so, but I should ask rms. > > Meanwhile, Simon, since you were just there, can you update the gnulib > manual to FDL 1.3+? I'm not the copyrigh

Re: missing gnu-oids.texi

Since commit 7c0e989 on Saturday, standards.texi now fails to build, because you did not add the file gnu-oids.texi to gnulib. Sorry, I added it now.

Re: fdl-1.3

> Subject: [PATCH] Add GFDLv1.3. Will standards.texi be swapped to use this new license? I presume so, but I should ask rms. Meanwhile, Simon, since you were just there, can you update the gnulib manual to FDL 1.3+? Thanks, Karl

Re: gnulib and distros

Having convinience copies of existing code The phrase "convenience copies" [sic] indicates they do not have a correct understanding of gnulib. A gnulib package updated monthly is mostly useless, as far as I can see. If they are going to start rejecting every package using gnulib, that will b

gnulib and distros

Hi, FYI, Debian apparently does not accept new packages that bundle gnulib, asking to rebootstrap with their packaged copy instead. http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=gnulib Just to know, what do you think about it? Afaics the Debian 'gnulib' package is refreshed monthly with a git checko

Re: [PATCH] Accept Bison's NEWS format.

On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Jim Meyering wrote: > In addition to this, you might want to adjust Bison's NEWS format. > Adding one more level of "*" will make it so that it can be navigated > via emacs' outline mode. I.e., you can make it so that each "* Changes > ..." line is a major heading, and where c

Re: [PATCH] Accept Bison's NEWS format.

"Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > announce-gen doesn't like Bison's NEWS format. The following patch fixes > it. Or should we consider reformatting Bison's NEWS file? Thanks. > >>From f289ed88ea6513e18709b6b65ea3875bbd375998 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Joel E. Denny <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: [PATCH] Accept Bison's NEWS format.

On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > - my $re_prefix = qr/\* (?:Noteworthy|Major) change/; > > + my $re_prefix = qr/\* (?:Noteworthy|Major) change|Changes/; > > What about > qr/(?:\* )?(?:Noteworthy c|Major c|C)(?i:hanges)/ I assume the trailing "s" isn't important. Anything that work

Re: [PATCH] random_r: new module

Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about this, as a reminder that we want to look periodically at the > changes done in glibc for this functionality? Or is config/srclist.txt > your preferred way of remembering this? Hi Bruno, I've been using config/srclist.txt, but if this annotation

missing gnu-oids.texi

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Since commit 7c0e989 on Saturday, standards.texi now fails to build, because you did not add the file gnu-oids.texi to gnulib. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE

Re: fdl-1.3

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Simon Josefsson on 11/4/2008 1:13 AM: > I've pushed this. > > /Simon > >>From 4df5306dfde4dea1d9b4c027defe8471d0fc62c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 09:12:32 +0100 > Subject:

Re: [PATCH] Implementations of random, srandom, initstate, setstate, rand, srand

> The glibc manual says that RAND_MAX > is the upper bound for random and random_r, but this statement is only valid > for glibc, since in glibc RAND_MAX = 2^31-1. The glibc bug report is here: Bruno

Re: fdl-1.3

Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I've pushed this. And this... /Simon >From c2deb4e15018dc6569cb9c42d0592854122bdde8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 09:13:59 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Add modules/fdl-1.3, forgotten in last commi

fdl-1.3

I've pushed this. /Simon >From 4df5306dfde4dea1d9b4c027defe8471d0fc62c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 09:12:32 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Add GFDLv1.3. --- ChangeLog|7 + MODULES.html.sh |1 + doc/fdl-1.3.texi | 506 ++