Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-grimoire - Re: [SM-Grimoire] glibc

sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>
  • To: Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] glibc
  • Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 11:48:41 +1000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I have been making some changes to the spell, every time a major spell like
glibc changes I think it should be tested by everyone. I want to know that
what I have changed has no bad consequences.
It "needs" to be fully tested before it goes into stable.
Sorcery now has a history showing feature so you can view my reasons for
wanting the spell checked. You can also remove it from the queue if you don't
want to cast it, but it will be put back into the queue unless you manually
change the date in /var/state/sorcery/packages.
Maybe choosing to remove a spell from the queue should alter the date stamp
of
that spell in that file too ?
I think my last few changes were removing gettext trigger , adding libiconv
trigger removing an "echo" into two alien files that caused "non-portable
whitespace" warnings from every spell cast (actually removing the files
altogether so make install does install them). If these changes didn't need
testing or rebuilding to (un)register triggers then I wouldn't have changed
UPDATED.
If you can tell me another way to get spell changes tested by everyone
without
changing UPDATED then I will use it.
Hamish

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 03:59, Geoffrey Derber wrote:
> I update my system on average about once a week, once every two weeks as
> time permits. I have noticed that EVERY time for the last month, two
> months, glibc requires a rebuild. I understand a forced rebuild because
> of say a security issue or some other issues. But for most issues just
> because of a bug fix in the glibc spell doesn't necessarily mean we need
> to rebuild it as well. Can we stop modifying the UPDATED field so much.
> Please update it if deamed absolutely necissary. I may be wrong in my
> assesment, but the amount I see it is forcing a rebuild just seems
> excessive to me.
>
> Btw, yes I have checked to make sure it updated correctly each time by
> creating a new queue to make sure it wasn't in there. So it's not that
> it the rebuild has failed and the next time I update the previous update
> is showing up.
>
> Geoff
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Grimoire mailing list
> SM-Grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-grimoire

- --
IRC nick: drmoriarty
SMGL co-conspirator
#Do You SMGL!?
# Linux so advanced it may as well be magic!
# http://www.sourcemage.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/e4QB8fSufZR6424RAhXTAKCCvrEaEwU5eFsr1hGpELmS/iVnKwCfRKPK
T9tB14fDhqbm6Aby4+O7lzk=
=CGqC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page