Randy McMurchy wrote: > Justin R. Knierim wrote these words on 01/25/06 20:21 CST: > > >>The patch name needs the "-1" between fixes and .patch. The ftp repo is >>updated. Thanks. > > > Thanks Justin. I will fix this. What sucks though, Is that I said > this not too long ago when there was another patch that was slightly > misnamed but was told that it was okay. But that was fiction. > > It used to be that if a patch didn't exist, or one was in the repo > that wasn't called for, there was a message sent to -book stating > this. > > I was told that it was still was the same way. Obviously it is not. > Something has changed. Bottom line is that we used to be notified > if there were discrepancies, however we are no longer. Bummer.
The discrepancies are found when the book is rendered. That is at 0215 CDT. Justing found the problem before the book was rendered. That said, I've recently moved the rendering process to anduin and need to relook at the scripts to make sure missing patches are, in fact, sent to -book. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
