On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:50:17 +0100, Pieter Praet <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:33:49 +0100, Thomas Jost <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello list, > > > > This is another rebased version of Pieter's series to add GPG and Emacs as > > test > > prereqs, plus some additions on my own. (Rebased and posted as requested by > > Pieter [1].) > > > > Thanks Thomas! > > Although... you may have misread (or maybe I mistyped :), but what I > actually intended [1] was for you to rebase *only* your fixes on top of > my rebased series (e.g. see "tjost-fixes.patch" in att), so you could > receive proper credit for cleaning up my mess.
Oh, ok, I must have misread that :) Right now your patches don't apply cleanly on master (conflict in patch 3 due to commit 5964a7), and I think that Dmitry's patches [1] may be a better way to handle prereqs. So I probably won't send those patches until we decide which approach is the way to go. [1] id:"[email protected]" > Also, while my apprehension [2,3] re the inclusion of the SCREEN/DTACH > prereq in patches #4,5,6 didn't have much merit (it's an all-or-nothing > affair anyways), the issue [3] in patch #5 @ "Reply within emacs" still > stands: `sed' will run unconditionally, and treat "EMACS" as an input > file. (see "sed-prereq-fix.patch" in att). Nice catch with this sed issue. Looks like I need to be more careful when replacing "OUTPUT" with "EMACS OUTPUT"... Thanks, -- Thomas/Schnouki
pgpsE3YkxBLkn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
