[pacman-dev] [GIT] The official pacman repository branch, master, updated. v3.1.4-182-gb48f703
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project "The official pacman repository".
The branch, master has been updated
via b48f703aa6da7d9863501df1488f851313998ebe (commit)
via 009f89c4d21fc08f16d648d8341137d36b0cde96 (commit)
via b32aa81b5eb00b5e07295f6bdfeb294a340842b8 (commit)
via 62ee1bfff08b358a11e08194adc5774a8a1cdf51 (commit)
via 1cca4ef764519c00326dc81669b2bbd4bf1b978f (commit)
via b262ddb2edb8a4622a9cd3c50f245a6fa7f35f75 (commit)
via f30dab4b5a382bc4886af6b64f721fd2b4884283 (commit)
via c1a5616c26a5c175c65dea61ca74a622c6930df8 (commit)
via da1c11cc30d0286f07d46bf2d910482c9a72f31c (commit)
via ad54b286802fd739532c9fd6f3bc6c7c431bddf4 (commit)
via ae40d1c05b2a164e922a19ddece1334bf5e55330 (commit)
via 9577c07d867eb0887bd524dc1cdaaa188fbe82f3 (commit)
via c33cabd6751d1d5903898c911701ce20cf77598d (commit)
via 20ae871940b8b7f773b0fdc31f8e053cc3cf4884 (commit)
via b9369a747d0c2fa3ee8371f99f5ca7acbc89f7f9 (commit)
via 149839c5391e9a93465f86dbb8d095a0150d755d (commit)
via 1d71079c5b57af2feb53fbfa98f93122a32ca154 (commit)
via 398d4aff2dc25585e51310ba2f7f8d64a9f52081 (commit)
from bf2964dc5841f49d1d5ab60181b0caa4670c1874 (commit)
Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have
not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those
revisions in full, below.
- Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
commit b48f703aa6da7d9863501df1488f851313998ebe
Author: Dan McGee
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Dan McGee
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "The official pacman repository".
The branch, master has been updated via b48f703aa6da7d9863501df1488f851313998ebe (commit) via 009f89c4d21fc08f16d648d8341137d36b0cde96 (commit) via b32aa81b5eb00b5e07295f6bdfeb294a340842b8 (commit) via 62ee1bfff08b358a11e08194adc5774a8a1cdf51 (commit) via 1cca4ef764519c00326dc81669b2bbd4bf1b978f (commit) via b262ddb2edb8a4622a9cd3c50f245a6fa7f35f75 (commit) via f30dab4b5a382bc4886af6b64f721fd2b4884283 (commit) via c1a5616c26a5c175c65dea61ca74a622c6930df8 (commit) via da1c11cc30d0286f07d46bf2d910482c9a72f31c (commit) via ad54b286802fd739532c9fd6f3bc6c7c431bddf4 (commit) via ae40d1c05b2a164e922a19ddece1334bf5e55330 (commit) via 9577c07d867eb0887bd524dc1cdaaa188fbe82f3 (commit) via c33cabd6751d1d5903898c911701ce20cf77598d (commit) via 20ae871940b8b7f773b0fdc31f8e053cc3cf4884 (commit) via b9369a747d0c2fa3ee8371f99f5ca7acbc89f7f9 (commit) via 149839c5391e9a93465f86dbb8d095a0150d755d (commit) via 1d71079c5b57af2feb53fbfa98f93122a32ca154 (commit) via 398d4aff2dc25585e51310ba2f7f8d64a9f52081 (commit) from bf2964dc5841f49d1d5ab60181b0caa4670c1874 (commit)
Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those revisions in full, below.
- Log ----------------------------------------------------------------- <snip> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of changes: PKGBUILD.proto | 2 +- lib/libalpm/add.c | 1 - lib/libalpm/alpm.h | 2 - lib/libalpm/be_files.c | 41 ++++-- lib/libalpm/handle.c | 3 - lib/libalpm/handle.h | 3 +- lib/libalpm/remove.c | 8 +- pactest/tests/{remove051.py => remove052.py} | 9 +- pactest/tests/{upgrade070.py => sync500.py} | 12 +- pactest/tests/{upgrade010.py => sync501.py} | 10 +- po/zh_CN.po | 178 +++++++++++++------------- scripts/makepkg.sh.in | 74 +++++++----- scripts/repo-add.sh.in | 4 +- src/pacman/callback.c | 1 - src/pacman/sync.c | 6 +- 15 files changed, 192 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-) copy pactest/tests/{remove051.py => remove052.py} (63%) copy pactest/tests/{upgrade070.py => sync500.py} (50%) copy pactest/tests/{upgrade010.py => sync501.py} (76%)
I just want to say thanks to Xavier for managing the patch queue while I was on vacation, and he assembled most of the patches above in his tree. I'm sure he had a lot of fun doing it. :) There has been a good amount of activity here lately, so if there are any outstanding patches that got lost in the shuffle, be sure to poke the thread so it comes to Xavier and I's attention. One currently known issue I am working on: my versioncmp change a while back definitely broke something, and I've written a short vercmp test script that I plan on incorporating into our codebase. You can see that on my working branch. -Dan
Dan McGee wrote:
One currently known issue I am working on: my versioncmp change a while back definitely broke something, and I've written a short vercmp test script that I plan on incorporating into our codebase. You can see that on my working branch.
You probably should add the mirror cases for these -1 return situations. +# with pkgrel, simple +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.0-1 0 +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.0-2 -1 +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5.0-2 1.5.1-1 -1 + +# with pkgrel, mixed lengths +runtest 1.5-1 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5-2 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5-2 1.5.1-2 -1 I've been bitten by bugs not picked up because of missing test cases too many times in the past not to include them.
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Allan McRae
Dan McGee wrote:
One currently known issue I am working on: my versioncmp change a while back definitely broke something, and I've written a short vercmp test script that I plan on incorporating into our codebase. You can see that on my working branch.
You probably should add the mirror cases for these -1 return situations.
+# with pkgrel, simple +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.0-1 0 +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.0-2 -1 +runtest 1.5.0-1 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5.0-2 1.5.1-1 -1 + +# with pkgrel, mixed lengths +runtest 1.5-1 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5-2 1.5.1-1 -1 +runtest 1.5-2 1.5.1-2 -1
I've been bitten by bugs not picked up because of missing test cases too many times in the past not to include them.
I know what you mean. I've already added another two test cases tonight after I got all the existing ones to pass and there were still problems. :) I made this script super easy to add test cases to though, so no real excuse to not include them. -Dan
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:42 AM, Allan McRae
You probably should add the mirror cases for these -1 return situations.
That makes perfect sense, I was thinking the same. But it is much better to automate the mirror cases, as Dan did with his last patch :)
participants (4)
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee
-
Dan McGee
-
Xavier