Hi! Ralph Glasstetter wrote:
>>Older versions of bash (i.e. bash2) have problems, and some other Bourne >>compatible shells may fail as well. >> >>I'm working on that. > > > Ups, you're right... I didn't thought of ancient shells... also under MinGW I > already had to change the #!/bin/bash to #!/bin/sh (whatever shell this is) > to make it work. I think it's bash as well. [...] >>>Hhmmm,... maybe it's a good idea to put it under version control, i.e. >>>allow for a comment line containing $Id$ and scan it also additionally by >>>setversion? >> >>Version control - yes. $Id$ line - not sure. > > > When you just commit/change this file alone, setversion wouldn't get the > correct revision after checkout if there's no $Id$-line... True. But I would like the file to be easy to parse. > OK, the same thing holds for the *.ui files,... but Ihope that you always > will > change some other files additionally to these... ;-) Maybe there's a way to add an id to the .ui files as well. >>>In case one "declares" an official version just by changing the text >>>file.... I attached an updated script allowing comments (and with a small >>>bug fix)! >> >>Maybe we should check for a .svn subdirectory. If none exists, the >>sources probably come from a release tarball. >> > > Is that a problem? Au contraire - it would be a good indicator if the program has been built from svn or not. That is, if it's a release version or not. > Will the source files in a release tarball not contain the resolved > $id:-lines? Or don't you want to have a revision number printed > in the dvdcut caption for "released" versions? I would prefer to have a version number for regular releases and a revision number for SVN builds. [...] >>>>You probably forgot to tell make that dvbcut.cpp now depends on >>>>version.h - if you don't, it will simply ignore any changes to the file. >>> >>>Hmmm, .... are the include files not checked automatically? >>>Also a "make dep" did not work... >> >>Did you add `#include "version.h"' to dvbcut.cpp? > > > Of course, I did. And the first build process was ok, but after "touch"ing > some header file version.h was not re-build... Probably a circular dependency or something like that. Maybe it's not such a good idea to use a header file. -- Michael "Tired" Riepe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Tired: Each morning I get up I die a little ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ DVBCUT-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dvbcut-user
