On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:29:31 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote:
On 02/18/2018 12:17 PM, Luke Shumaker wrote:
I don't mean to take credit away from Eli by re-working his patches (I credit him in the commit messages); I just wanted to make it clearer what is accomplished by each change, and how each of the changes relate to our goals; as well as actually testing each of them against the test suite. No need to resubmit someone else's amended patches, or resubmit not-amended patches with the statement "I've tested this" (you did that for devtools). Please just leave comments on the submitted patch.
There were also rebase/merge conflicts. I wanted to have a commit that fixed glob support (is_globfile), to verify that that worked before adding extglob support; re-ordering that/splitting those commits created rebase conflicts. I verified that the test status of each of the commits is as expected. I put the PKGEXT->PKGEXT_glob commit before the fix because it turns out that it's easy to accidentally effectively revert the test during that rename; and I wanted to ensure that it was still being tested by the time the fix is applied. This, of course, meant that your patches didn't apply cleanly. Noting the 3 patchsets that this incorporates: 1. luke1: Renaming PKGEXT->PKGEXT_glob from my first fix patchset 2. luke2: My testcase patch 3. eli : Eli's fix/extglob patchset The origin of the changes in each, and it's testsuite status: # origin test subject [1/8] new PASS test: common.bash:__getCheckSum: Don't rely on IFS [2/8] luke2+reroll FAIL test: db-update: @test "update same any package to same repository fails": change PKGEXT [3/8] luke1+reroll FAIL config: Rename PKGEXT to PKGEXT_glob [4/8] eli+reroll PASS Correctly treat PKGEXT_glob as a glob [5/8] eli+reroll PASS config: let PKGEXT_glob be an extglob; have its value match makepkg [6/8] eli PASS ftpdir-cleanup: fix typo in a comment ("pacakge") [7/8] eli PASS Replace all instances of `find` command with bash globbing [8/8] eli+reroll PASS ftpdir-cleanup, sourceballs: swap out [ -ge 1 ] for (( > 0 )) I don't believe the changes that are in commits 6 or 7 changed from your work, except that they got split in to separate commits. -- Happy hacking, ~ Luke Shumaker