[beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>
- To: beports@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 00:45:34 +0200
On 2008-05-27 at 00:22:11 [+0200], Andreas Färber <andreas.faerber@xxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> Am 27.05.2008 um 00:10 schrieb Ingo Weinhold:
>
> > On 2008-05-26 at 23:00:26 [+0200], Andreas Färber <andreas.faerber@xxxxxx
> > >
> > wrote:
> >> libiconv [...] [Ingo, if you're reading this, please have a look at
> >> config.sub,
> >> doesn't look correct to me?].
> >
> > Not sure what you mean. What do you think is wrong with config.sub?
>
> In one of the files in the libiconv patch (I thought it was in
> config.sub) there was a list of operating system expressions, such
> as ... | -beos* | ... whereas Haiku was listed as ... | -beos* |
> haiku* | ... without the dash. No idea if it has any significance but
> it caught my eye that it was the only one without dash.
Yep, that looks wrong. If that is the case block I think it is, the Haiku
case is already listed, BTW (several lines later).
Anyway, I'd recommend not to edit generated files (like config.guess,
config.sub, ltmain.sh,...) in the first place -- use the auto tools to
replace them instead -- and also not to include them in patches. Rather
document how to run which of the auto tools to replace them.
CU, Ingo
--
BePorts homepage - http://tools.assembla.com/BePorts
List archives: http://www.freelists.org/archives/beports
Administrative contact: brecht@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- [beports] [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Brecht Machiels
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Andreas Färber
Other related posts:
- » [beports] deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- » [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- [beports] [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Brecht Machiels
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Andreas Färber
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [beports] Re: deleting information (WAS Re: [RFC] Patch for gnulib's stdbool.h)
- From: Andreas Färber